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.

(MSNBC)   Dr. Ben Carson will no longer be speaking at Johns Hopkins after comparing gays to NAMBLA and people who want to have sex with turtles   (tv.msnbc.com) divider line 613
    More: Dumbass, NAMBLA, Dr. Ben Carson, Johns Hopkins, National Prayer Breakfasts, andrea mitchell, gay marriage ban, Presidential Medal of Freedom, gays  
•       •       •

13227 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Mar 2013 at 9:13 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2013-03-29 06:41:07 PM
I said after twice.

/I like after
//Guess he can cross his name off the top candidates list
///And move it to the future TV analyst list
 
2013-03-29 06:44:05 PM
Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.
 
2013-03-29 06:49:38 PM

Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.


To be fair, the type of person who would fit the Republican Rising Star category has a pretty high correlation with the type of person who would say something crazy and offensive.
 
2013-03-29 06:49:52 PM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

www.reactiongifs.com
 
2013-03-29 06:53:01 PM

Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.


They pretty much greased it with their own shiat.
 
2013-03-29 06:55:48 PM
These f*ckwits get knocked off faster than an Al Qaeda #2 man
 
2013-03-29 06:59:03 PM

Relatively Obscure: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

[www.reactiongifs.com image 193x135]


img.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-29 07:01:53 PM
I like turtles.
 
2013-03-29 07:02:08 PM
I'm surprised conservatives have a problem with what he said.
 
2013-03-29 07:21:04 PM

The_Sponge: I like turtles.


Well pretty soon you'll be able to marry one. Congrats. I am sure you'll be very happy together.
 
2013-03-29 07:37:29 PM

Relatively Obscure: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

[www.reactiongifs.com image 193x135]


Truly, this brilliant man is the Terror of the Left.
 
2013-03-29 07:52:13 PM
 If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

And this is what passes for intelligence in the GOP.
 
2013-03-29 08:06:31 PM

GAT_00: I'm surprised conservatives have a problem with what he said.


The problem isn't with the content of what he said, it was that he said it when the GOP is trying to rebrand itself.
 
2013-03-29 08:07:36 PM

TheManofPA: I said after twice.

/I like after
//Guess he can cross his name off the top candidates list
///And move it to the future TV analyst list


And comparing twice. Unless that's part of the joke and I don't get it.
 
2013-03-29 08:11:31 PM
As he should apologize. I fark GIRL turtles - the way God intended!
 
2013-03-29 08:13:33 PM

Relatively Obscure: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."


Sometimes a banana is just a banana.
 
2013-03-29 08:15:19 PM

revrendjim: Relatively Obscure: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

Sometimes a banana is just a banana.


God's greatest creation.
 
2013-03-29 08:17:38 PM

gilgigamesh: The_Sponge: I like turtles.

Well pretty soon you'll be able to marry one. Congrats. I am sure you'll be very happy together.


4.bp.blogspot.com
Combine NAMBLA and Turtle Farking and see what kind of sick deviance you get!
 
2013-03-29 08:22:34 PM
My belief is that marriage is between a white man and a white woman.  He doesn't get to change the definition.  Unless you're Abraham, in which case you can have sex with your slave Harah.  Or Solomon, in which case you can have 900 wives and a thousand concubines.  Wait, this is getting confusing.
 
2013-03-29 08:25:29 PM
I love that republicans also fail to recognize that the definition of marriage has changed quite a bit over the last couple of millennia.
 
2013-03-29 08:37:42 PM

kxs401: I love that republicans also fail to recognize that the definition of marriage has changed quite a bit over the last couple of millennia.


It's changed over the last hundred years or so.  120 years ago I could've had my bipolar wife committed for life to a mental institution because she was considered a piece of property.  Judaic, Muslim, and Hindu laws regard women as male property.  The world would be a much better place without a trace of religion.  It makes intelligent people think stupid things.
 
2013-03-29 08:47:52 PM

syrynxx: kxs401: I love that republicans also fail to recognize that the definition of marriage has changed quite a bit over the last couple of millennia.

It's changed over the last hundred years or so.  120 years ago I could've had my bipolar wife committed for life to a mental institution because she was considered a piece of property.  Judaic, Muslim, and Hindu laws regard women as male property.  The world would be a much better place without a trace of religion.  It makes intelligent people think stupid things.


Worse, it makes stupid people think they're intelligent.
And intelligently designed.
 
2013-03-29 08:53:46 PM
Nonsensical rambling about fruits while non-apologizing about gay people?
 
2013-03-29 09:16:21 PM
That's funny, because this guy looks like the end product of a NAMBLA adherent and a turtle having sex.
 
2013-03-29 09:16:28 PM
gregcookland.com
 
2013-03-29 09:17:14 PM

Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.


Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.
 
2013-03-29 09:19:15 PM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

 
2013-03-29 09:19:26 PM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

TLDR translation: "Potato..."
 
2013-03-29 09:19:37 PM
www.wepsite.de
 
2013-03-29 09:20:51 PM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

This...THIS...is the new Republican superstar??!

God, Palin was more coherent.
 
2013-03-29 09:21:54 PM
Consenting adult, child, goat... it's all the same, right?
 
2013-03-29 09:22:10 PM

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: [gregcookland.com image 432x568]


lafwtf
 
2013-03-29 09:22:17 PM

gilgigamesh: The_Sponge: I like turtles.

Well pretty soon you'll be able to marry one. Congrats. I am sure you'll be very happy together.


What you did there, Flo & Eddie & I see it.
 
2013-03-29 09:22:27 PM

syrynxx: My belief is that marriage is between a white man and a white woman.  He doesn't get to change the definition.  Unless you're Abraham, in which case you can have sex with your slave Harah.  Or Solomon, in which case you can have 900 wives and a thousand concubines.  Wait, this is getting confusing.


Sarah's handmaiden was Hagar.

/dept of corrections
 
2013-03-29 09:23:53 PM

Mrtraveler01: Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.

Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.


Near as I can tell the Palin-Cain Cycle is gaining momentum and now running its course in slightly less than a week.
 
2013-03-29 09:24:11 PM

Mrtraveler01: Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.


The criteria for "rising star" isn't very stringent these days.
 
2013-03-29 09:24:50 PM
Farking brain surgeon needs a farking brain.
 
2013-03-29 09:24:57 PM
I saw them on one of their first reunion tours a number of years ago.... judging by the total lack of afterparty NOBODY wanted to.have sex with the Turtles. But they were so happy together.
 
2013-03-29 09:25:00 PM
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-03-29 09:25:34 PM
And nothing of value is lost.
 
2013-03-29 09:26:10 PM

SuperNinjaToad: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."


So, he's got Rick Santorum's social conservatism, Steve Forbes' fiscal plans (a flat tax), and Sarah Palin's gift for making up sentences that make as much sense when read forward or backward.

/But he's blah, so he's certain to capture the blah vote, the same way Palin brought in the female vote. . .
 
2013-03-29 09:26:48 PM
Wait, isn't NAMBLA just Marlon Brando Look Alikes? What does sex have to do with it?
 
2013-03-29 09:26:55 PM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."]

i159.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-29 09:27:19 PM
They chase after me, man. They chase after me!

/Thanks, Smokey!
 
2013-03-29 09:27:42 PM
Lib Logic

All items in all lists are now being equated.
 
2013-03-29 09:27:44 PM

Relatively Obscure: As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease KY.


You missed an easy one.
 
2013-03-29 09:28:06 PM
Dr clearly stated his opinion and was not making comparisons as butt hurt folks interpret in their deluded minds. Too farking bad his opinion is not your own. Everybody gets to speak their mind in america until the government makes that illegal.
 
2013-03-29 09:29:13 PM

Bill_Wick's_Friend: syrynxx: My belief is that marriage is between a white man and a white woman.  He doesn't get to change the definition.  Unless you're Abraham, in which case you can have sex with your slave Harah.  Or Solomon, in which case you can have 900 wives and a thousand concubines.  Wait, this is getting confusing.

Sarah's handmaiden was Hagar.

/dept of corrections


And Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.
 
2013-03-29 09:29:34 PM

Mrtraveler01: Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.

Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.

Limbaugh: Ben Carson Has Democrats Scared To Death
 
2013-03-29 09:30:28 PM
Colon Powell/Condoleeza Rice '16

/Can't be worse than the last joers
 
2013-03-29 09:30:42 PM
The moment Worldnetdaily endorsed this guy I knew it was only a matter of time before he shoved his foot down his throat.
 
2013-03-29 09:30:49 PM

Relatively Obscure: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

[www.reactiongifs.com image 193x135]


I sincerely hope that Dr. Carson was treated for the stroke from which he was obviously suffering while he issued that statement.
 
2013-03-29 09:30:51 PM
Who here hasn't seen a sexy turtle and said "I wanna hit that?"  My wife won't let me keep a turtle in the house anymore after what I did to that last turtle.

/and it was consensual.
 
2013-03-29 09:32:01 PM
this man is also a Creationist. Your move, PZ MHuuurrryers
 
2013-03-29 09:32:24 PM

Sgt Otter: Mrtraveler01: Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.

Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.
Limbaugh: Ben Carson Has Democrats Scared To Death


I'm as afraid of that as I am afraid that North Korea is going to nuke Austin.
 
2013-03-29 09:32:57 PM

Mrtraveler01: Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.

Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.


Count yourself lucky. Those of us with wingnut relatives got the Fwd:fwd:fwd derpsignal.
 
2013-03-29 09:33:13 PM

willfullyobscure: this man is also a Creationist. Your move, PZ MHuuurrryers


How can a brain surgeon be this stupid?
 
2013-03-29 09:33:13 PM
Six week political career. Not bad.
 
2013-03-29 09:33:37 PM

Mrtraveler01: Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.

Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.


No, he isn't a rising star except in the minds of the libs who apparently dropped a collective load in their pants when he dared open his mouth and utter anything other than what they think he should have said at the prayer breakfast.  A person of color that thinks for him or herself is the scariest thing to a Dem and they must always be targetted for destruction usually with Uncle Tom type terminology.
 
2013-03-29 09:33:38 PM
Person A:  I like ice cream, Legos and boobies.

Lib:  OMG ice cream is nothing like Legos, HOW CAN YOU BE EQUATING THE TWO!?!?!?!
 
2013-03-29 09:33:42 PM

gilgigamesh: The_Sponge: I like turtles.

Well pretty soon you'll be able to marry one. Congrats. I am sure you'll be very happy together.


4.bp.blogspot.com

Back off boys, he's spoken for.
 
2013-03-29 09:33:57 PM

Great Janitor: Who here hasn't seen a sexy turtle and said "I wanna hit that?"  My wife won't let me keep a turtle in the house anymore after what I did to that last turtle.

/and it was consensual.


farm6.staticflickr.com
 
2013-03-29 09:34:10 PM
I had to read Gifted Hands in my 10th grade English class. All I got from it was how unbelievable it was that Ben Carson had a fat AND ugly wife while being 1)a doctor, and 2)"Gifted" with his hands.

But now I get it, who else would want to fark this tool.
 
2013-03-29 09:34:23 PM

KrispyKritter: Please point and laugh at me.  I need SOMEONE to pay attention to me.


Ok.

/Points.
//Laughs
///Ha-ha!
////Four slashies deep, Yo!
 
2013-03-29 09:35:11 PM
Just gotta keep him alive long enough to tell me the name on the grave.

/oh wait, that's Bill Carson. Never mind
 
2013-03-29 09:35:25 PM
You know, when I Google a phrase that starts "sex with ..." I expect to see some sick pron on the first page of hits at least. Google is a site have I come to trust to do its job and find weird shiat.

But apparently sex with turtles is so rare that even the web has a hard time coughing up examples. Maybe it has something to do with such hits as "turles have terrifying penises" or "how to tell if a turtle is male or female" or "Dr. Ben Carson has sex with turtles", which at least gets hits about Dr. Ben.
 
2013-03-29 09:37:28 PM

Hassan Ben Sobr:


Obviously asking for it.
 
2013-03-29 09:37:43 PM
I figured it was only a matter of time before he opened his mouth and reinforced the stereotype of a talented doctor who is a moron when he ventures into areas other than his own area of expertise.
 
2013-03-29 09:38:08 PM
Six weeks ago, hardly anyone knew who he was. But people who knew him placed him near the top of their "people I respect"

Now everyone knows who he is, and he is the laughingstock of the nation.

This is what happens when you listen to talk radio, believe that it is true, and then open your mouth.
 
2013-03-29 09:39:05 PM
I really don't get who much gayness causes certain people to loses their minds.  I mean, really.  Whether it's the Republicans, the Nazis, or brain-dead Muslim and Christian Fundamentalists, it's amazing how gayness just causes them to lose all perspective and make them want to turn to governmental "solutions" to a "problem" only they can identify.  Whether Republican, Nazi or Fundy, you are not allowed to use the government to enshrine your prejudice into law.
 
2013-03-29 09:39:21 PM

Benjimin_Dover: Mrtraveler01: Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.

Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.

No, he isn't a rising star except in the minds of the libs who apparently dropped a collective load in their pants when he dared open his mouth and utter anything other than what they think he should have said at the prayer breakfast.  A person of color that thinks for him or herself is the scariest thing to a Dem and they must always be targetted for destruction usually with Uncle Tom type terminology.


Somebody didn't get the memo from Rush Limbaugh (see link above).
 
2013-03-29 09:39:53 PM
"My impression is what's being asked for is the convenience of the title marriage, which is an institution that was established by God," Carson said.

And there's the rub. When I stepped before the priest on our wedding day, we didn't agree to enter into the bonds of marriage, we agreed to enter into holy matrimony as sanctioned by the church. When we signed the state license afterwards, THEN we entered into a marriage, as authorized and sanctioned by the state.

(Yes, I haven't sat down and thought all of this through, but this seems to be a good point of argument for me from here on out.)
 
2013-03-29 09:40:05 PM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

Why is it that no one in politics can just say something like "I really farked up, I was wrong, I'm really sorry"?
 
2013-03-29 09:40:10 PM

Silly Jesus: Person A:  I like ice cream, Legos and boobies.

Lib:  OMG ice cream is nothing like Legos, HOW CAN YOU BE EQUATING THE TWO!?!?!?!


Yet another example of conservatives (and therefore trolls posing as conservatives) lacking the ability to understand or make analogies.
 
2013-03-29 09:40:16 PM

Great Janitor: Who here hasn't seen a sexy turtle and said "I wanna hit that?"  My wife won't let me keep a turtle in the house anymore after what I did to that last turtle.

/and it was consensual.


Yeah, but turtles are sluts, everyone knows that.
 
2013-03-29 09:41:09 PM
The GOP's Great Black Hope Dope goes down!
 
2013-03-29 09:42:00 PM
im sure he will still be speaking, subby. just not at the commencement.
 
2013-03-29 09:42:45 PM
JohnTuttle:

(Yes, I haven't sat down and thought all of this through, but this seems to be a good point of argument for me from here on out.)

Marriage wasn't instituted by "God" so it isn't a valid argument.  Societies that have never heard of Judeochristianity still farking get married.
 
2013-03-29 09:44:02 PM

Mrtraveler01: willfullyobscure: this man is also a Creationist. Your move, PZ MHuuurrryers

How can a brain surgeon be this stupid?


he's an artist with a blade with the capacity to memorize and apply vast swaths of medical knowledge.  None of that necessitates an understanding of radiometeic dating, evolution, or astrophysics.  Or maybe Jesus helped him through his totally shiatty childhood and he's bought off on the whole thing on the way to getting mad paper.
 
2013-03-29 09:44:07 PM
Just because I have a sign that says "Dogs and Blacks Not Allowed," it doesn't mean I'm equating blacks and dogs. Heavans no! Those are just two unrelated things that happen to not be allowed. Totally different.
 
2013-03-29 09:44:20 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: The GOP's Great Black Hope Dope goes down!


And he was doing so well there for a while......

Then he opened his mouth.
 
2013-03-29 09:44:26 PM
"My impression is what's being asked for is the convenience of the title marriage, which is an institution that was established by God," Carson said.

ORLY? And when did this happen? Not to be a douchebag, but I'm pretty sure his ancestors might not agree with him considering that it was not okay for black people and white people to get married at one point.

I am not trying to turn this into a racial debate, so don't take it that way. My point is that I don't know where God said anything about marriage? Feel free to correct me if I am wrong (based on when/where that came from, not based on one's religious beliefs).
 
2013-03-29 09:45:32 PM
LETS NOT LISTEN TO HIM HES PROBABLY THE MOST GIFTED BLACK MAN ON THE PLANET RIGHT NOW OOO I FORGOT YOU CANT BE A GIFTED BLACK MAN IF YOU NOT A DEM KIND OF LIKE MLK YOU KNOW HE WAS ON THE RIGHT TO BUT THOSE PISKY MORALS AND THE WHOLE GOD THING ........STUPID ME
 
2013-03-29 09:45:41 PM
If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange.

I am still trying to decipher this profound yet complex axiom.

Why would you say an orange that I just gave you is not an orange even if you asked for an apple? and how would a non orange orange become a peach afterward even though it may have been originally an apple all along? this is deep folks deep!!
 
2013-03-29 09:45:51 PM

ilambiquated: Great Janitor: Who here hasn't seen a sexy turtle and said "I wanna hit that?"  My wife won't let me keep a turtle in the house anymore after what I did to that last turtle.

/and it was consensual.

Yeah, but turtles are sluts, everyone knows that.


Ninja sluts!!!
 
2013-03-29 09:46:25 PM

Mrtraveler01: willfullyobscure: this man is also a Creationist. Your move, PZ MHuuurrryers

How can a brain surgeon be this stupid?


A brain surgeon is just an auto mechanic who works with the engine running.
 
2013-03-29 09:48:52 PM

Hassan Ben Sobr:


Quite the climber, that one....
 
2013-03-29 09:49:00 PM
images.zap2it.com
Should read Sorry pamphlette
 
2013-03-29 09:49:03 PM

GAT_00: I'm surprised conservatives have a problem with what he said.


They don't; MSNBC likes to think that they do, though.
Deluded liberals are precious when they pontificate, aren't they?
 
2013-03-29 09:49:20 PM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

Neurosurgeon, heal thyself.
 
2013-03-29 09:49:25 PM

Minerva8918: "My impression is what's being asked for is the convenience of the title marriage, which is an institution that was established by God," Carson said.

ORLY? And when did this happen? Not to be a douchebag, but I'm pretty sure his ancestors might not agree with him considering that it was not okay for black people and white people to get married at one point.

I am not trying to turn this into a racial debate, so don't take it that way. My point is thaet I don't know where God said anything about marriage? Feel free to correct me if I am wrong (based on when/where that came from, not based on one's religious beliefs).


It wasn't allowed for Blacks to marry other Blacks without permission of a White man at one point in our history, either, and even when married, no White had to recognize the marriage in any way, shape or form.  Guess those marriages weren't godly.
 
2013-03-29 09:50:36 PM

sweet jeez: LETS NOT LISTEN TO HIM HES PROBABLY THE MOST GIFTED BLACK MAN ON THE PLANET RIGHT NOW OOO I FORGOT YOU CANT BE A GIFTED BLACK MAN IF YOU NOT A DEM KIND OF LIKE MLK YOU KNOW HE WAS ON THE RIGHT TO BUT THOSE PISKY MORALS AND THE WHOLE GOD THING ........STUPID ME


The fark are you going on about?

And what's with the all CAPS? This is Fark, not some mid-nineties AOL chat room.
 
2013-03-29 09:50:42 PM
Uncle Tom.
 
2013-03-29 09:51:33 PM

KrispyKritter: Dr clearly stated his opinion and was not making comparisons as butt hurt folks interpret in their deluded minds. Too farking bad his opinion is not your own. Everybody gets to speak their mind in america until the government makes that illegal.


I never know when you're being serious or not. By that statement I should have you Farkied in a much deeper shade of red.
 
2013-03-29 09:52:04 PM
Is it a five-assed turtle?
 
2013-03-29 09:52:16 PM

Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.


Weird, it kinda reminds me of all the Number Twos in Al Qaeda.

Flip smash there goes still another one and that's three for this month alone.

So much for The Great Blah Hope of the GOP.
 
2013-03-29 09:53:07 PM

JohnTuttle: "My impression is what's being asked for is the convenience of the title marriage, which is an institution that was established by God," Carson said.

And there's the rub. When I stepped before the priest on our wedding day, we didn't agree to enter into the bonds of marriage, we agreed to enter into holy matrimony as sanctioned by the church. When we signed the state license afterwards, THEN we entered into a marriage, as authorized and sanctioned by the state.

(Yes, I haven't sat down and thought all of this through, but this seems to be a good point of argument for me from here on out.)


Cut out the middle man. People who get married at the courthouse sign some papers and appear before a judge. No one asks about anyone's religious beliefs. It's not relevant.
 
2013-03-29 09:53:29 PM

Benjimin_Dover: A person of color that thinks for him or herself is the scariest thing to a Dem


Which is why we didn't elect Obama twice.
 
2013-03-29 09:54:38 PM
What does the National Association of Marlon Brando Look Alikes have to do with gay marriage or turtle farking?
 
2013-03-29 09:55:01 PM

Speaker2Animals: If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

And this is what passes for intelligence in the GOP.


Thing is, the dude is a pediatric neurosurgeon - not a job they just hand out to retards. My father was also a highly educated, menacingly intelligent man who for some reason let the derp break free when the conversation steered to politics or social norms. I'm sure plenty of you work with some highly pedigreed guy in the office down the hall who thinks Todd Akin makes sense and just got a raw deal from the liberal media. Then he goes back to designing a farking skyscraper or jet engine.

I've never understood how otherwise smart people can fall for politics that thrive on the lowest common denominator. I have a worthless BA from an equally worthless state drinking university that I don't recall attending, but even I know bullsh*t when I see it. Others can be educated in strict logic for 8 post-secondary years plus a residency and still can't count past potato. And I don't mean to say this because I disagree; I'm talking about actual stupidity, like the aforementioned Akin.

Meh, such is life.
 
2013-03-29 09:55:01 PM

LucklessWonder: Colon Powell/Condoleeza Rice '16

/Can't be worse than the last joers


Yeah, at least Powell and Rice both have functioning brains, unlike many other Republicans.
 
2013-03-29 09:56:08 PM

fusillade762: Consenting adult, child, goat... it's all the same, right?


as long as it's legitimate. or not legitimate. I can't remember.
 
2013-03-29 09:56:27 PM

Mrtraveler01: willfullyobscure: this man is also a Creationist. Your move, PZ MHuuurrryers

How can a brain surgeon be this stupid?


Affirmative action.
/ window seat please.
 
2013-03-29 09:57:11 PM
THIS is the conservative savior who is going to save the Republican Party?  Forget about the fact that he is an absolute tool.  farking Herman Cain could string a sentence together better than this guy.
 
2013-03-29 09:59:45 PM
This guy is a Seventh day Adventist right, I would have loved to see him being asked does your church really think going to church on Sunday instead of Saturday is the mark of the Beast? But no one would ask him that if he ran as a Republican.
 
2013-03-29 10:00:25 PM

dickfreckle: Speaker2Animals: If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

And this is what passes for intelligence in the GOP.

Thing is, the dude is a pediatric neurosurgeon - not a job they just hand out to retards. My father was also a highly educated, menacingly intelligent man who for some reason let the derp break free when the conversation steered to politics or social norms. I'm sure plenty of you work with some highly pedigreed guy in the office down the hall who thinks Todd Akin makes sense and just got a raw deal from the liberal media. Then he goes back to designing a farking skyscraper or jet engine.

I've never understood how otherwise smart people can fall for politics that thrive on the lowest common denominator. I have a worthless BA from an equally worthless state drinking university that I don't recall attending, but even I know bullsh*t when I see it. Others can be educated in strict logic for 8 post-secondary years plus a residency and still can't count past potato. And I don't mean to say this because I disagree; I'm talking about actual stupidity, like the aforementioned Akin.

Meh, such is life.


You don't have to be dumb to be a bigot.

/but it helps
 
2013-03-29 10:02:11 PM

Relatively Obscure: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

[www.reactiongifs.com image 193x135]


And this, folks, is exactly why when someone goes "I know this guy, he's a really smart dude, a paediatric neurosurgeon, in fact, but he thinks the world is flat and the moon is made of green cheese...."  that you are 100% wrong.  Our paediatric neurosurgeon friend is not smart, no matter how much neuroscience he may be operating on.  He is simply a well trained moron.
 
2013-03-29 10:02:18 PM

factoryconnection: Mrtraveler01: willfullyobscure: this man is also a Creationist. Your move, PZ MHuuurrryers

How can a brain surgeon be this stupid?

he's an artist with a blade with the capacity to memorize and apply vast swaths of medical knowledge.  None of that necessitates an understanding of radiometeic dating, evolution, or astrophysics.  Or maybe Jesus helped him through his totally shiatty childhood and he's bought off on the whole thing on the way to getting mad paper.


Nah

i4.ytimg.com
 
2013-03-29 10:03:26 PM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either.


i44.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-29 10:03:33 PM

Mrtraveler01: willfullyobscure: this man is also a Creationist. Your move, PZ MHuuurrryers

How can a brain surgeon be this stupid?


I know neurosurgeons who can't figure out how to clear a pager.
 
2013-03-29 10:03:59 PM
home.comcast.net

/I'd hit it.
 
2013-03-29 10:07:53 PM
Powell doesn't have the stomach for a presidential race after he carried water for Shrub.
 
2013-03-29 10:09:55 PM
KrispyKritter: Dr clearly stated his opinion and was not making comparisons


Carson told FOX News host Sean Hannity Tuesday,

"My thoughts are that marriage is between a man and a woman.

It's a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group,

be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality-

it doesn't matter what they are-they don't get to change the definition."


What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you.

What I was basically saying is there is no group.

I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal.

If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange.

And I say, that's a banana.

And that's not an apple either.

Or a peach, that's not an apple, either.

It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach.

In the same way I'm not equating those things.



He's throwing an entire friggin basket of fruit at us and he's speaking clearly??

Would you mind relating to us hippie nosepickers just what clarity was in here?

I'm all slathered with fruit pulp here and am entertaining deep thoughts concerning yogurt.
 
2013-03-29 10:10:49 PM
I find it ironic that one of the reasons this guy is a "rising star" of conservativism is that Hannity has been promoting him relentlessly and repeatedly inviting him on his program, and it's stuff that Carson said on Hannity that got him into hot water.
 
2013-03-29 10:11:57 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: These f*ckwits get knocked off faster than an Al Qaeda #2 man


Came here for this, leaving satisfied.
 
2013-03-29 10:11:59 PM

dickfreckle: Speaker2Animals: If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

And this is what passes for intelligence in the GOP.

Thing is, the dude is a pediatric neurosurgeon - not a job they just hand out to retards. My father was also a highly educated, menacingly intelligent man who for some reason let the derp break free when the conversation steered to politics or social norms. I'm sure plenty of you work with some highly pedigreed guy in the office down the hall who thinks Todd Akin makes sense and just got a raw deal from the liberal media. Then he goes back to designing a farking skyscraper or jet engine.

I've never understood how otherwise smart people can fall for politics that thrive on the lowest common denominator. I have a worthless BA from an equally worthless state drinking university that I don't recall attending, but even I know bullsh*t when I see it. Others can be educated in strict logic for 8 post-secondary years plus a residency and still can't count past potato. And I don't mean to say this because I disagree; I'm talking about actual stupidity, like the aforementioned Akin.

Meh, such is life.


Because they are not smart people.  Your father was not a smart person, the highly pedegreed jet engine designer down the hall is not a smart person, and this neurosurgeon is not a smart person.  They are morons.  Well trained morons, but morons nonetheless.
 
2013-03-29 10:12:20 PM

spongeboob: This guy is a Seventh day Adventist right, I would have loved to see him being asked does your church really think going to church on Sunday instead of Saturday is the mark of the Beast? But no one would ask him that if he ran as a Republican.


Fair enough but SDAs take seperation of church and state VERY seriously. If we have to have a republican we could do much much worse. Ive even known SDAs to support pro choice candidates soley because the religious right was for them.

(Not sda)
 
2013-03-29 10:12:53 PM
Herman Cain redux
 
2013-03-29 10:14:00 PM

dugitman: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: [gregcookland.com image 432x568]

lafwtf


That is the fine public artwork of my fair city.

 
2013-03-29 10:15:13 PM
media-cache-lt0.pinterest.com
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-03-29 10:15:31 PM

GAT_00: I'm surprised conservatives have a problem with what he said.


They don't. They have a problem with how he said it.  And they only have that problem because other people have a problem with what he said.
 
2013-03-29 10:16:41 PM
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net

"But enough about George W. Bush."
 
2013-03-29 10:16:52 PM

Mrtraveler01: How can a brain surgeon be this stupid?


C'mon, he's only 3/5ths of a neurosurgeon, after all.
 
2013-03-29 10:17:34 PM

Fart_Machine: You don't have to be dumb to be a bigot.

/but it helps


It's not just that, though. There's the whole "ZOMG SOCIALISM" type who happens to be an astrophysicist, etc. If your brain can be trained to retain all of that data, cause and effect, and about 4.5 millions words worth of jargon, why the fark can't you see that Barack Obama was indeed born in Hawaii and has to be the most incompetent socialist and Muslim usurper in the history of both? Bill ORLY is a prime example of this, though I'm pretty sure he just does it for the money. That doesn't explain your teabagging neighbor, though.

Like I said, I'm retarded and I even I can detect bullsh*t from 3 miles away.
 
2013-03-29 10:19:28 PM

Kittypie070: KrispyKritter: Dr clearly stated his opinion and was not making comparisons


Carson told FOX News host Sean Hannity Tuesday,

"My thoughts are that marriage is between a man and a woman.

It's a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group,

be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality-

it doesn't matter what they are-they don't get to change the definition."

What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you.

What I was basically saying is there is no group.

I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal.

If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange.

And I say, that's a banana.

And that's not an apple either.

Or a peach, that's not an apple, either.

It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach.

In the same way I'm not equating those things.


He's throwing an entire friggin basket of fruit at us and he's speaking clearly??

Would you mind relating to us hippie nosepickers just what clarity was in here?

I'm all slathered with fruit pulp here and am entertaining deep thoughts concerning yogurt.


Well, that's the thing:  He got busted lumping gay people in with pedophiles and bestiality lovers and his reaction was to make a hasty apology and verbally shiat his pants in front of the world in the process.

I'm sure it started out sounding logical and rational in his head 'oh, I was just naming off groups, yeah, I wasn't actually comparing them to each other, ho ho ho' and his mouth opened up and fruit fell out and he started babbling and whoops, I crapped my pants.

Somewhere, the rich white leaders of the GOP are crying bitterly.
 
182
2013-03-29 10:20:27 PM

Man On Pink Corner: [sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 487x371]

"But enough about George W. Bush."


haha,,,,nice.
 
2013-03-29 10:24:35 PM
Dr. Carson did not compare the 3 groups.  He listed the three groups as being those who fall in love but are not man/woman combinations.  In 2006 a Sudanese man married a goat, so there is precedent for his remark.
 
2013-03-29 10:26:27 PM
If I wanted to lessen the political prospects of a certain race, I would promote among that race people I know to be unprepared for public office, those who have opinions that are in direct opposition to the wildly accepted beliefs and principles of the vast majority of the scientific community, have a tendency of overestimation of their competency outside their main field of expertise, and an inability to keep their mouth shut about things outside those areas of expertize.  It is even better if this particular specimen is highly accomplished, as it makes it appear as even the most highly skilled of that race are unsuited to public office.  That this appears to be what the Republicans are doing is just a coincidence.
 
2013-03-29 10:27:44 PM
Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"
 
2013-03-29 10:27:58 PM
Well, Bye, Mr. Non-apology apology bigoted guy
 
2013-03-29 10:28:06 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-29 10:29:49 PM

dickfreckle: Speaker2Animals: If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

And this is what passes for intelligence in the GOP.

Thing is, the dude is a pediatric neurosurgeon - not a job they just hand out to retards. My father was also a highly educated, menacingly intelligent man who for some reason let the derp break free when the conversation steered to politics or social norms. I'm sure plenty of you work with some highly pedigreed guy in the office down the hall who thinks Todd Akin makes sense and just got a raw deal from the liberal media. Then he goes back to designing a farking skyscraper or jet engine.

I've never understood how otherwise smart people can fall for politics that thrive on the lowest common denominator. I have a worthless BA from an equally worthless state drinking university that I don't recall attending, but even I know bullsh*t when I see it. Others can be educated in strict logic for 8 post-secondary years plus a residency and still can't count past potato. And I don't mean to say this because I disagree; I'm talking about actual stupidity, like the aforementioned Akin.

Meh, such is life.


This is because you can be both intelligent and have some severe mental issues. Our society has created a situation where pathological hate of gays is common. Add to that some cult brainwashing from a young age and you can find a guy who is technically brilliant believe and say some stupid shiat. If a kidnapped person can fall in love with their captors imagine what 18 years of people teaching you about invisible sky man can do.

There are many ways to measure intelligence. People like this have their marbles stacked in too few baskets.
 
2013-03-29 10:30:31 PM

EmmaLou: Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"


Try going camping. A nice backpacking or canoe trip in a remote wilderness is a good way to get away from the derp. And everything else, really.
 
2013-03-29 10:30:41 PM

Mrtraveler01: willfullyobscure: this man is also a Creationist. Your move, PZ MHuuurrryers

How can a brain surgeon be this stupid?


Yep. Seems Dr. Carson is a follower of the Crocoduck School of Evolutionary Derp.

http://afarensis99.wordpress.com/2012/05/18/stupid-creationist-quote -o f-the-week-ben-carson-on-evolution/
 
2013-03-29 10:31:03 PM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."
i146.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-29 10:31:09 PM

RyogaM: If I wanted to lessen the political prospects of a certain race, I would promote among that race people I know to be unprepared for public office, those who have opinions that are in direct opposition to the wildly accepted beliefs and principles of the vast majority of the scientific community, have a tendency of overestimation of their competency outside their main field of expertise, and an inability to keep their mouth shut about things outside those areas of expertize.  It is even better if this particular specimen is highly accomplished, as it makes it appear as even the most highly skilled of that race are unsuited to public office.  That this appears to be what the Republicans are doing is just a coincidence.


upload.wikimedia.org

You were saying?
 
2013-03-29 10:31:12 PM
WTF??

I'm getting some hellacious cyan afterimages from that red thing.
 
2013-03-29 10:31:26 PM
OK, listen, we know that Alan Keyes and Herman Cain didn't work out, but this time we promise that the black guy we didn't fully vet and threw into the spotlight will totally be a viable candidate - nay the next Presidential candidate - for these United States of America.

Yours,
Reinhold Reince (Yessh that issss my real name) Priebus
 
2013-03-29 10:31:29 PM

agb1953: Dr. Carson did not compare the 3 groups.  He listed the three groups as being those who fall in love but are not man/woman combinations.  In 2006 a Sudanese man married a goat, so there is precedent for his remark.


And when I say that Republicans, Nazis and braindead Extremist Muslims and Christian fundamentalists all have an irrational hatred of gays and wish to use governmental means to impose their asinine prejudices, I'm not comparing them,  I'm just making it clear that there is a similarity between the three groups that everyone can see.  No need for anyone to get offended by that statement at all.
 
2013-03-29 10:31:31 PM
Being the new Republican Superstar is a lot like being the new drummer for Spinal Tap.
 
2013-03-29 10:31:39 PM
Speaking of, search "turtle sex" on youtube. Doggystyle, hilarious courting procedures, adorable facial expressions and priceless squeals of ecstasy. It is too funny.
 
2013-03-29 10:32:30 PM
And the hits just keep coming from the mouth-breathing community here on Fark
 
2013-03-29 10:32:41 PM
Carson is right, even though he may have been a bit ineloquent.
 
2013-03-29 10:33:39 PM

agb1953: Dr. Carson did not compare the 3 groups.  He listed the three groups as being those who fall in love but are not man/woman combinations.  In 2006 a Sudanese man married a goat, so there is precedent for his remark.


It is true he did not actually compare them, but he did lumb them into the same bucket thereby equating all three groups. That really isn't any better.
 
2013-03-29 10:33:51 PM

Silly Jesus: RyogaM: If I wanted to lessen the political prospects of a certain race, I would promote among that race people I know to be unprepared for public office, those who have opinions that are in direct opposition to the wildly accepted beliefs and principles of the vast majority of the scientific community, have a tendency of overestimation of their competency outside their main field of expertise, and an inability to keep their mouth shut about things outside those areas of expertize.  It is even better if this particular specimen is highly accomplished, as it makes it appear as even the most highly skilled of that race are unsuited to public office.  That this appears to be what the Republicans are doing is just a coincidence.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x210]

You were saying?



a.abcnews.com

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-03-29 10:34:07 PM
Oh, just another RepublicoFascist.
 
2013-03-29 10:34:14 PM

cptjeff: EmmaLou: Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"

Try going camping. A nice backpacking or canoe trip in a remote wilderness is a good way to get away from the derp. And everything else, really.


I've been seriously considering that.  I think being disconnected for a few days with definitely help.
 
2013-03-29 10:34:29 PM

agb1953: Dr. Carson did not compare the 3 groups.  He listed the three groups as being those who fall in love but are not man/woman combinations.  In 2006 a Sudanese man married a goat, so there is precedent for his remark.




He was forced to marry the goat or be killed after he was caught having sex with it.

So I am not sure if that is the precedent you really want.

Link
 
2013-03-29 10:34:41 PM
www.maniacworld.com
 
2013-03-29 10:35:06 PM
Duh guys. When Jesus wrote the bible he wrote it in English (not Spanish lol) for a reason. He used the word marriage because that is a man and a woman being married. Before Jesus came there was no marriage. Christians invented it!

Now the gays want to change the definition? I don't think so.
 
2013-03-29 10:35:52 PM

Benjimin_Dover: Mrtraveler01: Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.

Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.

No, he isn't a rising star except in the minds of the libs who apparently dropped a collective load in their pants when he dared open his mouth and utter anything other than what they think he should have said at the prayer breakfast.  A person of color that thinks for him or herself is the scariest thing to a Dem and they must always be targetted for destruction usually with Uncle Tom type terminology.


You sound...concerned.

And like a racist.
 
2013-03-29 10:37:38 PM

EmmaLou: cptjeff: EmmaLou: Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"

Try going camping. A nice backpacking or canoe trip in a remote wilderness is a good way to get away from the derp. And everything else, really.

I've been seriously considering that.  I think being disconnected for a few days with definitely help.


Get a good tent. I mean really.
 
2013-03-29 10:37:47 PM

Silly Jesus: RyogaM: If I wanted to lessen the political prospects of a certain race, I would promote among that race people I know to be unprepared for public office, those who have opinions that are in direct opposition to the wildly accepted beliefs and principles of the vast majority of the scientific community, have a tendency of overestimation of their competency outside their main field of expertise, and an inability to keep their mouth shut about things outside those areas of expertize.  It is even better if this particular specimen is highly accomplished, as it makes it appear as even the most highly skilled of that race are unsuited to public office.  That this appears to be what the Republicans are doing is just a coincidence.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x210]

You were saying?


When you promote a hundred people who happen to be certain race, an one turns out to be a dud, you are not going to foster an animus against that race. That is expected.

When you are the Republicans, and you promote 10 members who happen to be a certain race, and nine of them turn out to be duds, well, I'm just applying the same powers of observation Doc. Carson has in regards to Obama.  Clearly, one can assume the Republicans are trying to ruin Black Republicans by exposing them to scrutiny that are not prepared for.
 
2013-03-29 10:39:12 PM
img90.imageshack.us
 
2013-03-29 10:39:50 PM

ghare: EmmaLou: cptjeff: EmmaLou: Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"

Try going camping. A nice backpacking or canoe trip in a remote wilderness is a good way to get away from the derp. And everything else, really.

I've been seriously considering that.  I think being disconnected for a few days with definitely help.

Get a good tent. I mean really.


Rustics.

Seriously, if you need to get away, go get a hotel room for a week on the beach.  The woods are full of dirt, trees and animals.
 
2013-03-29 10:40:04 PM

xen0blue: [i.imgur.com image 850x566]


...What is that last one supposed to be?
 
2013-03-29 10:41:30 PM

Benjimin_Dover: A person of color that thinks for him or herself is the scariest thing to a Dem


LMFAO XD
 
2013-03-29 10:41:39 PM

part of the problem: spongeboob: This guy is a Seventh day Adventist right, I would have loved to see him being asked does your church really think going to church on Sunday instead of Saturday is the mark of the Beast? But no one would ask him that if he ran as a Republican.

Fair enough but SDAs take seperation of church and state VERY seriously. If we have to have a republican we could do much much worse. Ive even known SDAs to support pro choice candidates soley because the religious right was for them.
a
(Not sda)


SDA is for separation of church and state because they are afraid of the coming National Sunday Law that will force them to go to church on Sundays. They also believe the Pope or the Papacy is the anti-Christ, it is something they wont tell you at first.
They also have some very very weird health beliefs. I don't think they have officially renounced that masturbation causes all kinds of health problems.  Meat leads to cancer. You shouldn't eat fruit and vegetables at the same time because they 'fight' in the stomach. Vinegar is bad for you.
I have heard it preached in SDA churches if your child is a practicing homosexual you should shun them.
They tithe 10%, yeah I know lots of churches do you say, but in the SDA faith that tithe goes only to pay their clergy, every thing else upkeep on their churches, outreach programs is paid for by additional money the faithful have to give.  When you die you should leave everything to the Church because your kids may do something immoral with it.

I could go on.

/baptized as a SDA as an adult even though I told the preacher I had some reservations about the whole Ellen White prophet thing.
 
2013-03-29 10:41:40 PM
Sadly, as the Republicans continue the downward spiral to the wacky fringe, it gives a stage for idiots like this to spout their poison. Even sadder still is 1/2 of the voting population agrees.

I'm actually starting to wonder if this is some kind of undiagnosed mental illness caused by some environmental condition which causes people to think like this. After all, wasn't it lead plumbing that was a major contributing factor to the fall of the Romans?
 
2013-03-29 10:41:42 PM
I'm surprised there isn't some kind of 'law' or 'effect' named after the principal that as soon as some GOP flavor of the week is referred to as "terrifying" to liberals, they'll inevitably say something pants-on-head retarded within days.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-03-29 10:42:12 PM
Yeah baby!
 
2013-03-29 10:42:23 PM

LoneWolf343: xen0blue: [i.imgur.com image 850x566]

...What is that last one supposed to be?


Since troll posters post and run, I will chime in and say it's prolly blood relatives
 
2013-03-29 10:42:31 PM

agb1953: Dr. Carson did not compare the 3 groups.  He listed the three groups as being those who fall in love but are not man/woman combinations.  In 2006 a Sudanese man married a goat, so there is precedent for his remark.


Look, I just want to say that there are people bin this country that are bad for us. These groups are bad because they are fundamentally at odds with the American way of life. Child rapists, republicans, and serial killers all want to change our society for the worse.

Oh? Nah brah, I wasn't comparing those groups. I just put them down in the same sentence while trying to make a political point. Why you mad brah?

Nice try guy, but we know you really don't believe your claim.
 
2013-03-29 10:42:36 PM

nocturnal001: This is because you can be both intelligent and have some severe mental issues.


Case in point.
 
2013-03-29 10:43:26 PM

Void_Beavis: Sadly, as the Republicans continue the downward spiral to the wacky fringe, it gives a stage for idiots like this to spout their poison. Even sadder still is 1/2 of the voting population agrees.

I'm actually starting to wonder if this is some kind of undiagnosed mental illness caused by some environmental condition which causes people to think like this. After all, wasn't it lead plumbing that was a major contributing factor to the fall of the Romans?


Probably trans fats in fast food
 
2013-03-29 10:44:13 PM
By the way, Republicans, you are failing into the trap that you believe Affirmative Action creates.  There are so few Black Republicans, they are such a small part of the African American community, that you can't assume that all of them are ready to be affirmatively actioned into a position as major player in Republican party simply because they parrot your talking points and have dark skin.  You do it to yourselves, so don't blame us.
 
2013-03-29 10:44:54 PM

Infernalist: ghare: EmmaLou: cptjeff: EmmaLou: Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"

Try going camping. A nice backpacking or canoe trip in a remote wilderness is a good way to get away from the derp. And everything else, really.

I've been seriously considering that.  I think being disconnected for a few days with definitely help.

Get a good tent. I mean really.

Rustics.

Seriously, if you need to get away, go get a hotel room for a week on the beach.  The woods are full of dirt, trees and animals.


I was just camping on the beach. Nice place, and camping with me is very, very comfortable, especially trunk camping. I have everything. New prize: SVEA backpack stove, got for $3 at a yard sale.
 
2013-03-29 10:44:58 PM

agb1953: Dr. Carson did not compare the 3 groups.  He listed the three groups as being those who fall in love but are not man/woman combinations.  In 2006 a Sudanese man married a goat, so there is precedent for his remark.


When it's a Republican, one should refer to him using his full title, such as DOCTOR Carson and DOCTOR Paul, but when it's someone from the "Democrat Party," someone with a title is a liberal elite who should be shunned and told that he/she is not a Real 'merrican.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-03-29 10:45:12 PM

gja: Yeah baby!


s2.favim.com
 
2013-03-29 10:46:10 PM

Fart_Machine: nocturnal001: This is because you can be both intelligent and have some severe mental issues.

Case in point.


Nice. I learned about that guy on the dark matters TV show. Genius who got all culty and banged his wife's sister.

History is retarded (and awesome).
 
2013-03-29 10:46:13 PM
I saw a turtle.

/and then I farked it
 
2013-03-29 10:46:27 PM

RyogaM: Silly Jesus: RyogaM: If I wanted to lessen the political prospects of a certain race, I would promote among that race people I know to be unprepared for public office, those who have opinions that are in direct opposition to the wildly accepted beliefs and principles of the vast majority of the scientific community, have a tendency of overestimation of their competency outside their main field of expertise, and an inability to keep their mouth shut about things outside those areas of expertize.  It is even better if this particular specimen is highly accomplished, as it makes it appear as even the most highly skilled of that race are unsuited to public office.  That this appears to be what the Republicans are doing is just a coincidence.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x210]

You were saying?

When you promote a hundred people who happen to be certain race, an one turns out to be a dud, you are not going to foster an animus against that race. That is expected.

When you are the Republicans, and you promote 10 members who happen to be a certain race, and nine of them turn out to be duds, well, I'm just applying the same powers of observation Doc. Carson has in regards to Obama.  Clearly, one can assume the Republicans are trying to ruin Black Republicans by exposing them to scrutiny that are not prepared for.


There were three of them there, Fark's new posting thingy just split them up.  Anyway, those are just the first three I could think of off the top of my head.  I'm sure there are more.
 
2013-03-29 10:46:28 PM

Cuchulane:


*slow clap*
/aisle seat
 
2013-03-29 10:48:02 PM
I liked his 10% flat tax idea.
 
2013-03-29 10:48:40 PM

Boxcutta: agb1953: Dr. Carson did not compare the 3 groups.  He listed the three groups as being those who fall in love but are not man/woman combinations.  In 2006 a Sudanese man married a goat, so there is precedent for his remark.

When it's a Republican, one should refer to him using his full title, such as DOCTOR Carson and DOCTOR Paul, but when it's someone from the "Democrat Party," someone with a title is a liberal elite who should be shunned and told that he/she is not a Real 'merrican.


Were he a dem he would be called something like Dr Ben Larson, lolz cuz he lies like a lieberal amirite guys?
 
2013-03-29 10:49:02 PM

Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.


Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.
 
2013-03-29 10:50:37 PM
I had absolutely no idea that you could be a complete idiot and become a neurosurgeon.  Dammit, I so missed out on an easy career path!

"If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange."

I wouldn't want this guy anywhere near my brain.  He already hurts it over the internet!
 
2013-03-29 10:52:29 PM
upload.wikimedia.org

ballinyourcourt.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-03-29 10:52:43 PM

nocturnal001: Boxcutta: agb1953: Dr. Carson did not compare the 3 groups.  He listed the three groups as being those who fall in love but are not man/woman combinations.  In 2006 a Sudanese man married a goat, so there is precedent for his remark.

When it's a Republican, one should refer to him using his full title, such as DOCTOR Carson and DOCTOR Paul, but when it's someone from the "Democrat Party," someone with a title is a liberal elite who should be shunned and told that he/she is not a Real 'merrican.

Were he a dem he would be called something like Dr Ben Larson, lolz cuz he lies like a lieberal amirite guys?


Liberals be shoppin'.
 
2013-03-29 10:53:46 PM
img692.imageshack.us

"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."
 
2013-03-29 10:54:03 PM

Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.


Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?
 
2013-03-29 10:55:24 PM

nocturnal001: Fart_Machine: nocturnal001: This is because you can be both intelligent and have some severe mental issues.

Case in point.

Nice. I learned about that guy on the dark matters TV show. Genius who got all culty and banged his wife's sister.

History is retarded (and awesome).


The whole business/occult relationship with L. Ron Hubbard is wonderfully bugshait crazy.
 
2013-03-29 10:55:55 PM

Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?


That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.
 
2013-03-29 10:56:05 PM

Silly Jesus: There were three of them there, Fark's new posting thingy just split them up. Anyway, those are just the first three I could think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are more.


Two of whom are nowhere neat the embarrassment of Dr. Carson.  And, again, out of the hundreds of Blacks in the Democratic party, of course you are going to get duds.

As for the Republicans, you have Carson, Cain (remember, the farking Pizza guy the Republicans wanted to make President),  Alan Keyes, Michael Steele (nice guy, certainly not an embarrassment, but in no way ready to head the RNC),  and Clarence Thomas.  Off the top of my head.  None of the above would have amounted to a fart in a hurricane and been promoted by the Republicans if they had been White.

I'm going to give a pass to Condy Rice because it's impossible to determine how much incompetence she actually brought to the office when she was surrounded by an incompetent administration, and Colin Powell, because, also surrounded by incompetents, and, when he came out for Obama, was called a racist by the Republicans for doing so.  They've both had enough problems.
 
2013-03-29 10:57:28 PM

EmmaLou: Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"


Wouldn't that be nice?

Like I said. I'd e willing to test these people's homes for lead, murcury, radon... Something causes this bat shiat insanity. I want to understand this...
 
2013-03-29 10:57:53 PM
images.cryhavok.org
 
2013-03-29 10:58:13 PM

Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?


Yes, flat taxes are potato.
 
2013-03-29 10:59:06 PM
RIP BILL CARSON
www.wearysloth.com
DIED OF THIRST 1862
 
2013-03-29 11:01:02 PM
. And if we don't give them the right to transfer property and to have you know, visitation, etc., then we really should be examining that."

he doesn't know this? and yet he's speaking out about gay marriage.

yep, typical republican. good at his day job perhaps but farked up otherwise.
 
2013-03-29 11:01:58 PM

Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.


It's the kind of math Republicans do to make themselves feel better.
 
2013-03-29 11:02:28 PM
Sounds to me that the students at JHU are racist.
 
2013-03-29 11:03:09 PM

Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.


These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems
 
2013-03-29 11:06:01 PM

Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems


Holy shiat dude, did you even read that list?  Name five countries on that list with a 10% flat tax rate that you'd want to live in rather than the U.S.A.
 
2013-03-29 11:06:24 PM

RyogaM: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.

It's the kind of math Republicans do to make themselves feel better.


Wow, lots of tax experts here tonight.  There are also about 10 states and one Canadian province that could use your services....along with those 41 countries.  They are evidently all gravely mistaken in their taxation policies.  Please save them, oh superior ones.
 
2013-03-29 11:07:53 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-29 11:08:32 PM
FTFA: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

"What I'm basically saying is, you're all a bunch of fruits."
 
2013-03-29 11:08:45 PM

RyogaM: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems

Holy shiat dude, did you even read that list?  Name five countries on that list with a 10% flat tax rate that you'd want to live in rather than the U.S.A.


What about these states?  Could you even live in any of them?  Or Alberta?!?  OMG!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#At_the_state_or_provincial_lev el
 
2013-03-29 11:09:10 PM
**** *** ******
 
2013-03-29 11:12:34 PM

Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.


There's a lot to like about a flat tax. Sadly, no one with sane social policy supports it. Probably due to the fact that the income gap right now is at an all-time high.

Nobody wants to talk about how a flat tax is going to affect funds held in the Cayman Islands.

The Russians just dealt with embezzled mafia funds held in Cyprus banks and you see how that turned out. Criminals will do anything to hold on to their stolen money, including collapsing the world economy.
 
2013-03-29 11:14:32 PM
A good article summing up the pros and cons of the Flat Tax.

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/pros-cons-flat-tax-4210.html
 
2013-03-29 11:15:36 PM
Deep thoughts concerning yogurt

i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-29 11:16:04 PM

Silly Jesus: RyogaM: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems

Holy shiat dude, did you even read that list?  Name five countries on that list with a 10% flat tax rate that you'd want to live in rather than the U.S.A.

What about these states?  Could you even live in any of them?  Or Alberta?!?  OMG!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#At_the_state_or_provincial_lev el


I live in Ohio.  The highest state income tax bracket in my state is 5.9% for couples over $200000.  My bracket right now is less than every flat tax you listed except Col.  And no, I would not want to live in Col.  So, thanks, I would not like to raise my tax rate to give a break to those making over $200,000.

Way to ignore my challenge to name 5 countries, btw.  You're a bold debater, you are.
 
2013-03-29 11:17:19 PM
Silly Jesus:

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems


God I love that list. Offshore bankers like the Seychelles and Anguilla, and economic powerhouses like Serbia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

FTL:
Greenland 37 to 46% (depending on the municipality)

Greenland's got municipalities? How would you like to work for Greenland's equivalent of the IRS?

Saudi Arabia 2.5% zakat (citizens of GCC countries) 20% income tax (foreigners)

Suuuure.  Betcha that doesn't include jizyah.
 
2013-03-29 11:18:24 PM

Infernalist: ghare: EmmaLou: cptjeff: EmmaLou: Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"

Try going camping. A nice backpacking or canoe trip in a remote wilderness is a good way to get away from the derp. And everything else, really.

I've been seriously considering that.  I think being disconnected for a few days with definitely help.

Get a good tent. I mean really.

Rustics.

Seriously, if you need to get away, go get a hotel room for a week on the beach.   The woods are full of dirt, trees and animals.


And campfires, and waking up right next to a beautiful stream, and no TV to distract, lots of birdsong, air that smells nice, no cars, no stupid electronic noises and beeping...

You can bring a fly rod along and add fresh fish to the deal if you like, cooked right on that campfire even.

Seriously, if you have access to a car, internet, TV, and your smartphone, you aren't really getting away.
 
2013-03-29 11:18:57 PM

RyogaM: Silly Jesus: RyogaM: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems

Holy shiat dude, did you even read that list?  Name five countries on that list with a 10% flat tax rate that you'd want to live in rather than the U.S.A.

What about these states?  Could you even live in any of them?  Or Alberta?!?  OMG!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#At_the_state_or_provincial_lev el

I live in Ohio.  The highest state income tax bracket in my state is 5.9% for couples over $200000.  My bracket right now is less than every flat tax you listed except Col.  And no, I would not want to live in Col.  So, thanks, I would not like to raise my tax rate to give a break to those making over $200,000.

Way to ignore my challenge to name 5 countries, btw.  You're a bold debater, you are.


I guess the point I was trying to make that he keeps ignoring that a flat tax could work in theory, but 10% is so low that it's borderline retarded.
 
2013-03-29 11:19:39 PM

MBooda: Silly Jesus:

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems

God I love that list. Offshore bankers like the Seychelles and Anguilla, and economic powerhouses like Serbia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

FTL:
Greenland 37 to 46% (depending on the municipality)

Greenland's got municipalities? How would you like to work for Greenland's equivalent of the IRS?

Saudi Arabia 2.5% zakat (citizens of GCC countries) 20% income tax (foreigners)

Suuuure.  Betcha that doesn't include jizyah.


Yeah but there are states too!

States work the same way countries do right?
 
2013-03-29 11:21:00 PM

Mrtraveler01: A good article summing up the pros and cons of the Flat Tax.

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/pros-cons-flat-tax-4210.html


So, essentially, the cons are that IRS workers would lose their job and that the government wouldn't have enough money taken from the rich to give to the poor, poor, pitiful poor.  Those don't really seem like cons to me.  And there were quite a few pros.
 
2013-03-29 11:21:52 PM

bill4935: [images.cryhavok.org image 515x634]


Cowabunga, dude!
 
2013-03-29 11:22:12 PM

cptjeff: Infernalist: ghare: EmmaLou: cptjeff: EmmaLou: Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"

Try going camping. A nice backpacking or canoe trip in a remote wilderness is a good way to get away from the derp. And everything else, really.

I've been seriously considering that.  I think being disconnected for a few days with definitely help.

Get a good tent. I mean really.

Rustics.

Seriously, if you need to get away, go get a hotel room for a week on the beach.   The woods are full of dirt, trees and animals.

And campfires, and waking up right next to a beautiful stream, and no TV to distract, lots of birdsong, air that smells nice, no cars, no stupid electronic noises and beeping...

You can bring a fly rod along and add fresh fish to the deal if you like, cooked right on that campfire even.

Seriously, if you have access to a car, internet, TV, and your smartphone, you aren't really getting away.


I like being in the woods.  My wife thinks its full of bugs and dirt and trees.  She likes nice hotels, so I stay in them a lot.  And I will admit that as nice as a quiet forest glade is, there is something to be said about room service.

/ Hotel del Coronado, here I come...
 
2013-03-29 11:22:32 PM

Mrtraveler01: I guess the point I was trying to make that he keeps ignoring that a flat tax could work in theory, but 10% is so low that it's borderline retarded


I agree.  There is no f'n way a 10% flat tax would work.  25% or 30%, maybe.  If that's what the Republicans want, I say, Proceed.
 
2013-03-29 11:23:15 PM

RyogaM: Silly Jesus: RyogaM: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems

Holy shiat dude, did you even read that list?  Name five countries on that list with a 10% flat tax rate that you'd want to live in rather than the U.S.A.

What about these states?  Could you even live in any of them?  Or Alberta?!?  OMG!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#At_the_state_or_provincial_lev el

I live in Ohio.  The highest state income tax bracket in my state is 5.9% for couples over $200000.  My bracket right now is less than every flat tax you listed except Col.  And no, I would not want to live in Col.  So, thanks, I would not like to raise my tax rate to give a break to those making over $200,000.

Way to ignore my challenge to name 5 countries, btw.  You're a bold debater, you are.


A flat tax would give a tax break to those over 200,000?  Huh?

Also, I didn't accept your nifty challenge because it was asinine.  The standard for the tax being mathematically plausible in the U.S. isn't whether or not I want to live in Jamaica.  There are a couple of other variables that might make the U.S. different from Eastern Europe that aren't flat tax related.
 
2013-03-29 11:23:24 PM

Great Janitor: Who here hasn't seen a sexy turtle and said "I wanna hit that?"  My wife won't let me keep a turtle in the house anymore after what I did to that last turtle.

/and it was consensual.


I may have found your video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHI8LnoixFE
 
2013-03-29 11:24:30 PM
Can the the last person who supports the GOP just shut the lights off on their way out.  Thanks.
 
2013-03-29 11:25:02 PM

Mrtraveler01: RyogaM: Silly Jesus: RyogaM: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems

Holy shiat dude, did you even read that list?  Name five countries on that list with a 10% flat tax rate that you'd want to live in rather than the U.S.A.

What about these states?  Could you even live in any of them?  Or Alberta?!?  OMG!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#At_the_state_or_provincial_lev el

I live in Ohio.  The highest state income tax bracket in my state is 5.9% for couples over $200000.  My bracket right now is less than every flat tax you listed except Col.  And no, I would not want to live in Col.  So, thanks, I would not like to raise my tax rate to give a break to those making over $200,000.

Way to ignore my challenge to name 5 countries, btw.  You're a bold debater, you are.

I guess the point I was trying to make that he keeps ignoring that a flat tax could work in theory, but 10% is so low that it's borderline retarded.


Oh, I didn't get that that was your point.  I'm not locked in to the 10%...I just liked the flat tax idea.  I was just throwing a number out there.
 
2013-03-29 11:25:35 PM

cptjeff: Infernalist: ghare: EmmaLou: cptjeff: EmmaLou: Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"

Try going camping. A nice backpacking or canoe trip in a remote wilderness is a good way to get away from the derp. And everything else, really.

I've been seriously considering that.  I think being disconnected for a few days with definitely help.

Get a good tent. I mean really.

Rustics.

Seriously, if you need to get away, go get a hotel room for a week on the beach.   The woods are full of dirt, trees and animals.

And campfires, and waking up right next to a beautiful stream, and no TV to distract, lots of birdsong, air that smells nice, no cars, no stupid electronic noises and beeping...

You can bring a fly rod along and add fresh fish to the deal if you like, cooked right on that campfire even.

Seriously, if you have access to a car, internet, TV, and your smartphone, you aren't really getting away.


So much this.

I've been seriously considering a beach retreat to a nice bed and breakfast style retreat free for any and all electronic devices and a good book. I've got plans for a cheap but good choice in Cape May, NJ at the end of May this year with my wife and I think it's probably just what the doctor ordered for my blood pressure.
 
2013-03-29 11:26:16 PM

Mrtraveler01: MBooda: Silly Jesus:

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems

God I love that list. Offshore bankers like the Seychelles and Anguilla, and economic powerhouses like Serbia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

FTL:
Greenland 37 to 46% (depending on the municipality)

Greenland's got municipalities? How would you like to work for Greenland's equivalent of the IRS?

Saudi Arabia 2.5% zakat (citizens of GCC countries) 20% income tax (foreigners)

Suuuure.  Betcha that doesn't include jizyah.

Yeah but there are states too!

States work the same way countries do right?


No, totally different.  They aren't at all like small countries....and counties aren't at all like small states....
 
2013-03-29 11:28:24 PM

Kittypie070: Deep thoughts concerning yogurt

[i.imgur.com image 600x450]


But is it fruit yogurt? I like fruit yogurt.
 
2013-03-29 11:28:42 PM

Silly Jesus: A flat tax would give a tax break to those over 200,000? Huh?

Also, I didn't accept your nifty challenge because it was asinine. The standard for the tax being mathematically plausible in the U.S. isn't whether or not I want to live in Jamaica. There are a couple of other variables that might make the U.S. different from Eastern Europe that aren't flat tax related.


You aren't really good at this at all.  But, on the plus side, I'm going to bed soon, so you will get the last word.

Yes, as has been pointed out, a 10% flat tax, as espoused by the latest Black friend of the Republicans, would not, under any circumstances work in the U.S., and anyone who can't figure that out, well, they ain't ready to be made the latest face of Republican Black outreach, that's fer sure.
 
2013-03-29 11:28:53 PM
ecx.images-amazon.com
 
2013-03-29 11:29:17 PM
zombiesruineverything.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-03-29 11:31:25 PM
So about the whole flat tax thing. Point is, there are no real world examples for how this would go down for a major economy like the United States who set a very global economic market presence. Therefore it's highly unlikely that the United States will be willing to jeopardize that position with such a radical change to a major component that affects market economics like taxation. The risk is too high.
 
2013-03-29 11:31:42 PM

Gyrfalcon: Kittypie070: Deep thoughts concerning yogurt

[i.imgur.com image 600x450]


But is it fruit yogurt? I like fruit yogurt.


I have the feeling it's some Scandinavian-area clabbered dairy product.
 
2013-03-29 11:32:37 PM

ko_kyi: Great Janitor: Who here hasn't seen a sexy turtle and said "I wanna hit that?"  My wife won't let me keep a turtle in the house anymore after what I did to that last turtle.

/and it was consensual.

I may have found your video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHI8LnoixFE


Hot turtle on boot action.

/fappin'
 
2013-03-29 11:32:45 PM

cptjeff: Infernalist: ghare: EmmaLou: cptjeff: EmmaLou: Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"

Try going camping. A nice backpacking or canoe trip in a remote wilderness is a good way to get away from the derp. And everything else, really.

I've been seriously considering that.  I think being disconnected for a few days with definitely help.

Get a good tent. I mean really.

Rustics.

Seriously, if you need to get away, go get a hotel room for a week on the beach.   The woods are full of dirt, trees and animals.

And campfires, and waking up right next to a beautiful stream, and no TV to distract, lots of birdsong, air that smells nice, no cars, no stupid electronic noises and beeping...

You can bring a fly rod along and add fresh fish to the deal if you like, cooked right on that campfire even.

Seriously, if you have access to a car, internet, TV, and your smartphone, you aren't really getting away.


To each their own.  I know how to turn my stuff off and open a window if I want clean air.  And if I want fish, I'm sure the hotel staff can point me at a nice restaurant.
 
2013-03-29 11:32:59 PM

gilgigamesh: The_Sponge: I like turtles.

Well pretty soon you'll be able to marry one. Congrats. I am sure you'll be very happy together.


I just got flashbacks to Pokey the turtle in Ernest Goes to Camp.
 
2013-03-29 11:33:54 PM

Mrtraveler01: Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.


If you're black and agree with the GOP, you are a rising star.

i5.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-29 11:34:19 PM

Type_Hard: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

TLDR translation: "Potato..."


No... Recycled corn.
 
2013-03-29 11:34:46 PM

Silly Jesus: Oh, I didn't get that that was your point. I'm not locked in to the 10%...I just liked the flat tax idea. I was just throwing a number out there.


Everyone was arguing that The Math Did Not Add Up.  That's an argument against a 10% flat tax, not the tax itself.

Being for a Flat Tax without mentioning a rate that is actually mathematically realistic is like being for Free hookers and Blow for everyone, without saying how you pay for it.  It's asinine.  Like Doc. Carson.
 
2013-03-29 11:35:41 PM

Kittypie070: Deep thoughts concerning yogurt


D'aww.

Are kittens crunchy when you eat them despite their soft, furry shell?

These are the questions the bastard part of my brain demand answers to every day.
 
2013-03-29 11:39:02 PM

Void_Beavis: Kittypie070: Deep thoughts concerning yogurt

D'aww.

Are kittens crunchy when you eat them despite their soft, furry shell?

These are the questions the bastard part of my brain demand answers to every day.


Uh, they're tender all the way through, it's only the little bones that are crunchy.

/these are the kinda questions that kept me outta Harvard -- George Carlin
 
2013-03-29 11:39:03 PM

Loucifer: Is it a five-assed turtle?


Oh, that would be a great, if unanticipated, use for a pentadong.
 
2013-03-29 11:40:37 PM

RyogaM: Silly Jesus: Oh, I didn't get that that was your point. I'm not locked in to the 10%...I just liked the flat tax idea. I was just throwing a number out there.

Everyone was arguing that The Math Did Not Add Up.  That's an argument against a 10% flat tax, not the tax itself.

Being for a Flat Tax without mentioning a rate that is actually mathematically realistic is like being for Free hookers and Blow for everyone, without saying how you pay for it.  It's asinine.  Like Doc. Carson.


Usually libs argue against the flat tax on the basis of "the poors will have to pay as much (percentage wise) as the wealthy, and that's not faaaaaaiiiiiiiirrrrrr."  I was caught off guard.
 
2013-03-29 11:42:31 PM

Kittypie070: Void_Beavis: Kittypie070: Deep thoughts concerning yogurt

D'aww.

Are kittens crunchy when you eat them despite their soft, furry shell?

These are the questions the bastard part of my brain demand answers to every day.

Uh, they're tender all the way through, it's only the little bones that are crunchy.

/these are the kinda questions that kept me outta Harvard -- George Carlin


Which leads to my next question.

And how do you know this?

/hugs kittypie just because her crazy kitty ass is one of my favorited posters here and I love it so blargh.
 
2013-03-29 11:43:49 PM

Zulu_as_Kono: Loucifer: Is it a five-assed turtle?

Oh, that would be a great, if unanticipated, use for a pentadong.


I like the cut of your jib, sir.
 
2013-03-29 11:47:11 PM

agb1953: Dr. Carson did not compare the 3 groups.  He listed the three groups as being those who fall in love but are not man/woman combinations.  In 2006 a Sudanese man married a goat, so there is precedent for his remark.


You be sure to let us know when this "precedent" happens somewhere other than a 3rd world backwater.
 
2013-03-29 11:47:31 PM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

The important thing is you've convinced yourself this word-salad covers your obvious brain fart.
 
2013-03-29 11:50:09 PM
Most other like ________ folks probably agree with him but don't want to cut off the gravy train.
 
2013-03-29 11:51:42 PM
Learning how to do something takes no critical thinking skills whatsoever.  Challenging existing thought and coming up with new things takes intelligence, rote memorization takes none.  Morons can be taught complicated tasks and autistic people can be "savants", but it doesn't make them smart.
 
2013-03-29 11:56:29 PM

Relatively Obscure: NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association


National Association for Marlon Brando Look Alikes.
duh
 
2013-03-29 11:56:56 PM

Void_Beavis: Kittypie070: Deep thoughts concerning yogurt

D'aww.

Are kittens crunchy when you eat them despite their soft, furry shell?

These are the questions the bastard part of my brain demand answers to every day.


Ew, you don't eat the shell. Just the soft purry innards.

But not my kitteh. I'll swoop on anyone who goes after my kitteh.
 
2013-03-29 11:59:56 PM

BobCumbers: Most other like ________ folks probably agree with him but don't want to cut off the gravy train.


Republican?
 
2013-03-30 12:00:59 AM

MBooda: Betcha that doesn't include jizyah.


Jizyah? I hardly even know yah!
 
2013-03-30 12:01:08 AM

Ennuipoet: gilgigamesh: The_Sponge: I like turtles.

Well pretty soon you'll be able to marry one. Congrats. I am sure you'll be very happy together.

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 273x412]
Combine NAMBLA and Turtle Farking and see what kind of sick deviance you get!


That's sick! How dare you post a picture of incest!
/depending on which series you go by
//dear lord, why do I know that about TMNT?
 
2013-03-30 12:01:16 AM
Another GOPer will foot in mouth disease?
 
2013-03-30 12:02:47 AM
 
2013-03-30 12:05:09 AM
One Cuil = One level of abstraction away from the reality of a situation.
Example: You ask me for a Hamburger.
1 Cuil: if you asked me for a hamburger, and I gave you a raccoon.
2 Cuils: If you asked me for a hamburger, but it turns out I don't really exist. Where I was originally standing, a picture of a hamburger rests on the ground.
3 Cuils: You awake as a hamburger. You start screaming only to have special sauce fly from your lips. The world is in sepia.
4 Cuils: Why are we speaking German? A mime cries softly as he cradles a young cow. Your grandfather stares at you as the cow falls apart into patties. You look down only to see me with pickles for eyes, I am singing the song that gives birth to the universe.
5 Cuils: You ask for a hamburger, I give you a hamburger. You raise it to your lips and take a bite. Your eye twitches involuntarily. Across the street a father of three falls down the stairs. You swallow and look down at the hamburger in your hands. I give you a hamburger. You swallow and look down at the hamburger in your hands. You cannot swallow. There are children at the top of the stairs. A pickle shifts uneasily under the bun. I give you a hamburger. You look at my face, and I am pleading with you. The children are crying now. You raise the hamburger to your lips, tears stream down your face as you take a bite. I give you a hamburger. You are on your knees. You plead with me to go across the street. I hear only children's laughter. I give you a hamburger. You are screaming as you fall down the stairs. I am your child. You cannot see anything. You take a bite of the hamburger. The concrete rushes up to meet you. You awake with a start in your own bed. Your eye twitches involuntarily. I give you a hamburger. As you kill me, I do not make a sound. I give you a hamburger.
6 Cuils: You ask me for a hamburger. My attempt to reciprocate is cut brutally short as my body experiences a sudden lack of electrons. Across a variety of hidden dimensions you are dismayed. John Lennon hands me an apple, but it slips through my fingers. I am reborn as an ocelot. You disapprove. A crack echoes through the universe in defiance of conventional physics as cosmological background noise shifts from randomness to a perfect A Flat. Children everywhere stop what they are doing and hum along in perfect pitch with the background radiation. Birds fall from the sky as the sun engulfs the earth. You hesitate momentarily before allowing yourself to assume the locus of all knowledge. Entropy crumbles as you peruse the information contained within the universe. A small library in Phoenix ceases to exist. You stumble under the weight of everythingness, Your mouth opens up to cry out, and collapses around your body before blinking you out of the spatial plane. You exist only within the fourth dimension. The fountainhead of all knowledge rolls along the ground and collides with a small dog. My head tastes sideways as spacetime is reestablished, you blink back into the corporeal world disoriented, only for me to hand you a hamburger as my body collapses under the strain of reconstitution. The universe has reasserted itself. A particular small dog is fed steak for the rest of its natural life. You die in a freak accident moments later, and you soul works at the returns desk for the Phoenix library. You disapprove. Your disapproval sends ripples through the inter-dimensional void between life and death. A small child begins to cry as he walks toward the stairway where his father stands.
7 Cuils: I give you a hamburger. The universe is engulfed within itself. A bus advertising hotdogs drives by a papillon. It disapproves. An unnatural force reverses Earth's gravity. You ask for a hamburger. I reciprocate with a mildly convulsing potato. You disapprove. Your disapproval releases a cosmic shift in the void between birth and life. You ask for a hamburger. A certain small dog feasts on hamburger patties for the rest of its unnatural, eternal endurance. Your constant disapproval sends silence through everything. A contrived beast becomes omnipotent. You ask for a hamburger. I give you a hamburger your body becomes an unsettled blob of nothingness, then divides by three. The papillon barks. The universe realigns itself. You, the papillon, and the hamburger disapprove. This condemnation stops the realignment. Hades freezes over. A pig is launched is launched into the unoccupied existence between space and time with a specific hamburger. You ask for a hamburger. I give you a hamburger. It screams as you lift it to your face. You laugh maniacally as I plead with you. You devour the hamburger as it pleads for mercy. I disapprove and condemn you to an eternity in a certain void where a certain pig and its specific hamburger are located. The Universal Space-time Continuum Committee disapproves of my irrational decision. You are locked away and are fed hamburgers for the rest of your natural existence. A pickle refuses to break down during the process of digestion. You die in a freak accident. A certain pickle lives the rest of its life in a comatose state. Your soul disapproves. Down the street a child cries as a hamburger gets stuck in, and climbs back up, her esophagus. You ask again for a hamburger. I refuse to reciprocate. You demand a lawyer. I remind you harshly that this is the new world order. Lawyers no longer exist. Only papillons. Your name is written on a list of sins. Blasphemy. You ask for a hamburger. The comatose pickle vanquishes your soul from this universe. Realignment occurs. You beg for a hamburger. A certain papillon's name is written on an obelisk in Egypt. Mumble. Peasants worship the obelisk. Your soulless corpse partakes in the festivity. Hamburgers are banned universally. The sun implodes. All planets cease to have ever existed. Mercury. Venus. Earth. Mars. Jupiter. Saturn. Uranus. Neptune. Pluto is the only mass in existence. Conveniently, you are on vacation here. Your need for hamburgers re-establishes space-time. Earth is recreated under your intergalactic rule. Hamburgers are your army. You wake up. Clowns. Clowns everywhere. Your dream rushes to meet you. You are kidnapped. You ask for a hamburger. They hand you a hotdog.
 
2013-03-30 12:07:15 AM

fusillade762: You be sure to let us know when this "precedent" happens somewhere other than a 3rd world backwater.


I just had to post this, from the Salt Lake Trib:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/56073795-90/marriage-duck-lake -s alt.html.csp
 
2013-03-30 12:07:40 AM
"When you're walking home tonight and some great homicidal maniac comes after you with a bunch of loganberries, don't come crying to me! Now, the passion fruit. When your assailant lunges at you with a passion fruit, thus..."
 
2013-03-30 12:09:26 AM
victorycabal: Why is it that no one in politics can just say something like "I really farked up, I was wrong, I'm really sorry"?
=================================================

Because they weren't sorry and they really meant what they said.
 
2013-03-30 12:10:13 AM

error 303: One Cuil = One level of abstraction away from the reality of a situation.
Example: You ask me for a Hamburger.
1 Cuil: if you asked me for a hamburger, and I gave you a raccoon.
2 Cuils: If you asked me for a hamburger, but it turns out I don't really exist. Where I was originally standing, a picture of a hamburger rests on the ground.
3 Cuils: You awake as a hamburger. You start screaming only to have special sauce fly from your lips. The world is in sepia.
4 Cuils: Why are we speaking German? A mime cries softly as he cradles a young cow. Your grandfather stares at you as the cow falls apart into patties. You look down only to see me with pickles for eyes, I am singing the song that gives birth to the universe.
5 Cuils: You ask for a hamburger, I give you a hamburger. You raise it to your lips and take a bite. Your eye twitches involuntarily. Across the street a father of three falls down the stairs. You swallow and look down at the hamburger in your hands. I give you a hamburger. You swallow and look down at the hamburger in your hands. You cannot swallow. There are children at the top of the stairs. A pickle shifts uneasily under the bun. I give you a hamburger. You look at my face, and I am pleading with you. The children are crying now. You raise the hamburger to your lips, tears stream down your face as you take a bite. I give you a hamburger. You are on your knees. You plead with me to go across the street. I hear only children's laughter. I give you a hamburger. You are screaming as you fall down the stairs. I am your child. You cannot see anything. You take a bite of the hamburger. The concrete rushes up to meet you. You awake with a start in your own bed. Your eye twitches involuntarily. I give you a hamburger. As you kill me, I do not make a sound. I give you a hamburger.
6 Cuils: You ask me for a hamburger. My attempt to reciprocate is cut brutally short as my body experiences a sudden lack of electrons. Across a variety of hidden dimensions you are dismayed. John Lennon hands me an apple, but it slips through my fingers. I am reborn as an ocelot. You disapprove. A crack echoes through the universe in defiance of conventional physics as cosmological background noise shifts from randomness to a perfect A Flat. Children everywhere stop what they are doing and hum along in perfect pitch with the background radiation. Birds fall from the sky as the sun engulfs the earth. You hesitate momentarily before allowing yourself to assume the locus of all knowledge. Entropy crumbles as you peruse the information contained within the universe. A small library in Phoenix ceases to exist. You stumble under the weight of everythingness, Your mouth opens up to cry out, and collapses around your body before blinking you out of the spatial plane. You exist only within the fourth dimension. The fountainhead of all knowledge rolls along the ground and collides with a small dog. My head tastes sideways as spacetime is reestablished, you blink back into the corporeal world disoriented, only for me to hand you a hamburger as my body collapses under the strain of reconstitution. The universe has reasserted itself. A particular small dog is fed steak for the rest of its natural life. You die in a freak accident moments later, and you soul works at the returns desk for the Phoenix library. You disapprove. Your disapproval sends ripples through the inter-dimensional void between life and death. A small child begins to cry as he walks toward the stairway where his father stands.
7 Cuils: I give you a hamburger. The universe is engulfed within itself. A bus advertising hotdogs drives by a papillon. It disapproves. An unnatural force reverses Earth's gravity. You ask for a hamburger. I reciprocate with a mildly convulsing potato. You disapprove. Your disapproval releases a cosmic shift in the void between birth and life. You ask for a hamburger. A certain small dog feasts on hamburger patties for the rest of its unnatural, eternal endurance. Your constant disapproval sends silence through everything. A contrived beast becomes omnipotent. You ask for a hamburger. I give you a hamburger your body becomes an unsettled blob of nothingness, then divides by three. The papillon barks. The universe realigns itself. You, the papillon, and the hamburger disapprove. This condemnation stops the realignment. Hades freezes over. A pig is launched is launched into the unoccupied existence between space and time with a specific hamburger. You ask for a hamburger. I give you a hamburger. It screams as you lift it to your face. You laugh maniacally as I plead with you. You devour the hamburger as it pleads for mercy. I disapprove and condemn you to an eternity in a certain void where a certain pig and its specific hamburger are located. The Universal Space-time Continuum Committee disapproves of my irrational decision. You are locked away and are fed hamburgers for the rest of your natural existence. A pickle refuses to break down during the process of digestion. You die in a freak accident. A certain pickle lives the rest of its life in a comatose state. Your soul disapproves. Down the street a child cries as a hamburger gets stuck in, and climbs back up, her esophagus. You ask again for a hamburger. I refuse to reciprocate. You demand a lawyer. I remind you harshly that this is the new world order. Lawyers no longer exist. Only papillons. Your name is written on a list of sins. Blasphemy. You ask for a hamburger. The comatose pickle vanquishes your soul from this universe. Realignment occurs. You beg for a hamburger. A certain papillon's name is written on an obelisk in Egypt. Mumble. Peasants worship the obelisk. Your soulless corpse partakes in the festivity. Hamburgers are banned universally. The sun implodes. All planets cease to have ever existed. Mercury. Venus. Earth. Mars. Jupiter. Saturn. Uranus. Neptune. Pluto is the only mass in existence. Conveniently, you are on vacation here. Your need for hamburgers re-establishes space-time. Earth is recreated under your intergalactic rule. Hamburgers are your army. You wake up. Clowns. Clowns everywhere. Your dream rushes to meet you. You are kidnapped. You ask for a hamburger. They hand you a hotdog.


Hmmmm.......should there be a cuils level simply named "Ben Carson"?

Which number should it substitute?
 
2013-03-30 12:10:27 AM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-30 12:10:39 AM

SuperNinjaToad: If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange.

I am still trying to decipher this profound yet complex axiom.

Why would you say an orange that I just gave you is not an orange even if you asked for an apple? and how would a non orange orange become a peach afterward even though it may have been originally an apple all along? this is deep folks deep!!


Dr. Ben Carson has a lot to teach us about how to defend yourself from fresh fruit. What if a gay guy comes at you with a crate of raspberries?
 
2013-03-30 12:12:40 AM

gilgigamesh: The_Sponge: I like turtles.

Well pretty soon you'll be able to marry one. Congrats. I am sure you'll be very happy together.

>

No matter how they tossed the dice, it had to be. Turtles.
 
2013-03-30 12:16:54 AM

KrispyKritter: Dr clearly stated his opinion and was not making comparisons as butt hurt folks interpret in their deluded minds. Too farking bad his opinion is not your own. Everybody gets to speak their mind in america until the government makes that illegal.


No one here is or want to deny him the right to speak his "mind".
We just reserve the right to laugh and call him a f*cking moron homophobe when he does so.
That's my opinion.

Here's a little tidbit you should have learned earlier in life: All opinions are not equally valid.

What, you actually think that opinions should never be questioned?

When you put an opinion out in the public sphere, it will be read, poked, tested as to it's veracity, logic and relativity, examined, debated and judged. If you can't handle that, keep your howling screamer shut.
 
2013-03-30 12:19:14 AM
Internet Meme Rogers:
Dr. Ben Carson has a lot to teach us about how to defend yourself from fresh fruit. What if a gay guy comes at you with a crate of raspberries?

Then you unleash the Bengal Tiger.
 
2013-03-30 12:20:31 AM
 If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things.

All I wanted was a Pepsi.
 
2013-03-30 12:20:44 AM
Any more fruit and I could make a mean salad!
 
2013-03-30 12:21:01 AM
Pretty much every Republican I know has assured me at one time or another that Obama only got elected president because he's black. I guess if you buy into that line of thinking you can convince yourself that any black person willing to parrot right wing talking points will be the next big savior of the Republican Party.
 
2013-03-30 12:29:04 AM

kxs401: GAT_00: I'm surprised conservatives have a problem with what he said.

The problem isn't with the content of what he said, it was that he said it when the GOP is trying to rebrand itself.


The poker isn't long nor hot enough to rebrand that herd of fools.
 
2013-03-30 12:31:18 AM

CorporatePerson: Pretty much every Republican I know has assured me at one time or another that Obama only got elected president because he's black. I guess if you buy into that line of thinking you can convince yourself that any black person willing to parrot right wing talking points will be the next big savior of the Republican Party.


If white bigots don't appeal to the Coalition of African-American Pastors why not try a black one?
 
2013-03-30 12:33:43 AM

Void_Beavis: Kittypie070: Void_Beavis: Kittypie070: Deep thoughts concerning yogurt

D'aww.

Are kittens crunchy when you eat them despite their soft, furry shell?

These are the questions the bastard part of my brain demand answers to every day.

Uh, they're tender all the way through, it's only the little bones that are crunchy.

/these are the kinda questions that kept me outta Harvard -- George Carlin

Which leads to my next question.

And how do you know this?

/hugs kittypie just because her crazy kitty ass is one of my favorited posters here and I love it so blargh.


I have been known to poke them in order to discover their composition.

Very very carefully, mind you. They do squeak a bit when poked.

/hugs you and Gyrfalcon back
 
2013-03-30 12:35:11 AM

Cymbal: sweet jeez: LETS NOT LISTEN TO HIM HES PROBABLY THE MOST GIFTED BLACK MAN ON THE PLANET RIGHT NOW OOO I FORGOT YOU CANT BE A GIFTED BLACK MAN IF YOU NOT A DEM KIND OF LIKE MLK YOU KNOW HE WAS ON THE RIGHT TO BUT THOSE PISKY MORALS AND THE WHOLE GOD THING ........STUPID ME

The fark are you going on about?

And what's with the all CAPS? This is Fark, not some mid-nineties AOL chat room.


It's a desperate attempt to get on people's ignored lists.
 
2013-03-30 12:36:47 AM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

www.trilobite.org
 
2013-03-30 12:39:31 AM
Liberal McCarthyism is in full effect.
 
2013-03-30 12:42:30 AM

garron: Liberal McCarthyism is in full effect.

 www.tucksbrand.com
 
2013-03-30 12:43:58 AM
1.bp.blogspot.com

If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange.
Your next stop, the Twilight Zone...!
 
2013-03-30 12:47:41 AM
So we're now up to "two days running"...

I said it would take a week for you to get around to whining about how hateful Republicans were after one of your own went on a bigoted little tirade to the cheer and adoration of more than a few.

It took you two days, and now we're on day three and you're doing it again. I should really learn to stop underestimating you people.

Incidentally that feeling of validation you have for catching this guy saying something unpopular in no way changes the fact that he's been handing you your rears on a silver platter on most of what you believe in.

Or really, I could just behave like you do when somebody is critical of Obama... You're obviously just a bunch of racists trying to keep a well spoken and intelligent black man down.

Oh and we haven't forgotten how "nicely" you treated the black actress for supporting Romney as the good and open minded liberals spewed racist hate speech at her.

But Carson said something bad, you go on, feel good about yourselves.
 
2013-03-30 12:48:35 AM

garron: I might as well toss in the buzzwords "Uncle Tom" and "Democrat plantation" too while I'm obeying my programming.


Oh, so John Birchers are granola snorting hippies now, huh?

What did I just f*ckin say about the TWILIGHT ZONE, boy!!??
 
2013-03-30 12:52:15 AM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."
i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-30 12:53:38 AM
Why must we always destroy anyone who has an unpopular position? Let the guy speak. How could it hurt?
 
2013-03-30 12:54:05 AM

garron: Liberal McCarthyism is in full effect.


Wait, how is this liberal McCarthyism again?
 
2013-03-30 01:00:45 AM

randomjsa: I said it would take a week for you to get around to whining about how hateful Republicans were after one of your own went on a bigoted little tirade to the cheer and adoration of more than a few.


Wait, I'm lost here.

randomjsa: Incidentally that feeling of validation you have for catching this guy saying something unpopular in no way changes the fact that he's been handing you your rears on a silver platter on most of what you believe in.


Wait, he has?

randomjsa: Oh and we haven't forgotten how "nicely" you treated the black actress for supporting Romney as the good and open minded liberals spewed racist hate speech at her.


The one I didn't care who she supported?

Eh whatever, go back to feeling persecuted. God knows what you'd do to yourself without that persecution complex of yours.
 
2013-03-30 01:02:06 AM

garron: Liberal McCarthyism is in full effect.


YYyyyesssSS??!

Oh, PLEASE, mon frere, DO go on, you little cutie!!
 
2013-03-30 01:02:53 AM

Ima4nic8or: Why must we always destroy anyone who has an unpopular position? Let the guy speak. How could it hurt?


I don't know about you, but I live in a basement and have no friends. Anonymously attacking internet strangers is as close to success as I'll ever get. Your mom dresses you funny.
 
2013-03-30 01:03:57 AM
i think randumbjsa is a furry
 
2013-03-30 01:10:42 AM
Don't feed the trolls. They never come back for the crumbs
 
2013-03-30 01:18:56 AM

Kittypie070: i think randumbjsa is a furry


think or hope, Kitty? ;)
 
2013-03-30 01:20:03 AM

Ima4nic8or: Why must we always destroy anyone who has an unpopular position? Let the guy speak. How could it hurt?


he says he doesn't want to since it'll distract from the commencement ceremonies. Even dumbasses can make classy moves.
 
2013-03-30 01:22:59 AM
"My thoughts are that marriage is between a man and a woman. It's a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality-it doesn't matter what they are-they don't get to change the definition."

Yeah, that's equating.

Good on the Johns Hopkins students and faculty for raising a stink about his invite to speak at commencement.

randomjsa: ...Carson said something bad...

Indeed.
 
2013-03-30 01:33:14 AM

skullkrusher: Kittypie070: i think randumbjsa is a furry

think or hope, Kitty? ;)


Dunno, my readings of the emitted derpfield are inconclusive.

Aside from that, vichyssoise.
 
2013-03-30 01:34:32 AM
I knew this guy was going to crash and burn after watching the prayer breakfast speech.  All the right winger got wet panties about the speech, but clearly didn't watch it.  They just thought it was neat he was "sticking it" to Obama (which he wasn't).  His entire speech was extreme right wing talking points.  Nothing new, nothing helpful.  The speech wasn't even particularly well delivered.

For the last time, it's not the messaging, it's the message.  Hating gays, punishing poor people/minorities and corporatism are not where the majority of american's sit ideologically at the moment.
 
2013-03-30 01:43:02 AM

YodaTuna: at the moment.


So what you're saying is, there's hope.
 
2013-03-30 01:46:58 AM

error 303: One Cuil = One level of abstraction away from the reality of a situation.
Example: You ask me for a Hamburger.
1 Cuil: if you asked me for a hamburger, and I gave you a raccoon.
2 Cuils: If you asked me for a hamburger, but it turns out I don't really exist. Where I was originally standing, a picture of a hamburger rests on the ground.
3 Cuils: You awake as a hamburger. You start screaming only to have special sauce fly from your lips. The world is in sepia.
4 Cuils: Why are we speaking German? A mime cries softly as he cradles a young cow. Your grandfather stares at you as the cow falls apart into patties. You look down only to see me with pickles for eyes, I am singing the song that gives birth to the universe.
5 Cuils: You ask for a hamburger, I give you a hamburger. You raise it to your lips and take a bite. Your eye twitches involuntarily. Across the street a father of three falls down the stairs. You swallow and look down at the hamburger in your hands. I give you a hamburger. You swallow and look down at the hamburger in your hands. You cannot swallow. There are children at the top of the stairs. A pickle shifts uneasily under the bun. I give you a hamburger. You look at my face, and I am pleading with you. The children are crying now. You raise the hamburger to your lips, tears stream down your face as you take a bite. I give you a hamburger. You are on your knees. You plead with me to go across the street. I hear only children's laughter. I give you a hamburger. You are screaming as you fall down the stairs. I am your child. You cannot see anything. You take a bite of the hamburger. The concrete rushes up to meet you. You awake with a start in your own bed. Your eye twitches involuntarily. I give you a hamburger. As you kill me, I do not make a sound. I give you a hamburger.
6 Cuils: You ask me for a hamburger. My attempt to reciprocate is cut brutally short as my body experiences a sudden lack of electrons. Across a variety of hidden dimensions you are dis ...


So where on this scale does a typical Old Spice commercial fall?
 
2013-03-30 02:04:05 AM
"Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia..."

I haven't read this whole thread, but did anybody else notice that he didn't compare gay relationships to pedophilia?
 
2013-03-30 02:05:40 AM
So by this standard, Joe Biden is never allowed to speak in public, EVER???   Good to know.
 
2013-03-30 02:08:20 AM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach...."

www.reactiongifs.com
 
2013-03-30 02:09:25 AM

DrPainMD: "Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia..."

I haven't read this whole thread, but did anybody else notice that he didn't compare gay relationships to pedophilia?


So stating that one thing that is not bad and two things that are really bad and in no way related to the first thing in the same sentence is not making a comparison?  A reasonable person who say yes.
 
2013-03-30 02:14:00 AM

jpo2269: So by this standard, Joe Biden is never allowed to speak in public, EVER???   Good to know.


That would be an example of 8 Cuils, the level otherwise known as Republicuilism, correct?

Oh, no, wait. I think that requires a mention of Benghazi, the Second Amendment and/or Obama's birth certificate. Nevermind.
 
2013-03-30 02:14:18 AM

Kittypie070: ...vichyssoise.

I love it when you speak French!

DrPainMD: "Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia..."

I haven't read this whole thread, but did anybody else notice that he didn't compare gay relationships to pedophilia?


I culled the quote FTFA where he compared gays wanting the right to get legally married to NAMBLA so I'm pretty sure you're full of shiat.

/5 posts above yours.
 
2013-03-30 02:19:18 AM

randomjsa: So we're now up to "two days running"...

I said it would take a week for you to get around to whining about how hateful Republicans were after one of your own went on a bigoted little tirade to the cheer and adoration of more than a few.

It took you two days, and now we're on day three and you're doing it again. I should really learn to stop underestimating you people.

Incidentally that feeling of validation you have for catching this guy saying something unpopular in no way changes the fact that he's been handing you your rears on a silver platter on most of what you believe in.

Or really, I could just behave like you do when somebody is critical of Obama... You're obviously just a bunch of racists trying to keep a well spoken and intelligent black man down.

Oh and we haven't forgotten how "nicely" you treated the black actress for supporting Romney as the good and open minded liberals spewed racist hate speech at her.

But Carson said something bad, you go on, feel good about yourselves.


Ladies and gentlemen this what a dumb person sounds like when they try to be smug.
 
2013-03-30 02:21:01 AM

gingerjet: DrPainMD: "Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia..."

I haven't read this whole thread, but did anybody else notice that he didn't compare gay relationships to pedophilia?

So stating that one thing that is not bad and two things that are really bad and in no way related to the first thing in the same sentence is not making a comparison?  A reasonable person who say yes.


I'm going to have to disagree with you and say he did bring up pedophilia.  NAMBLA are a group of pedophiles, they just happen to be specifically male on male pedophiles.
 
2013-03-30 02:21:07 AM
Hollie Maea: This is what happens when you listen to talk radio, believe that it is true, and then open your mouth.

the world is a better place when idiots are vocal
 
2013-03-30 02:27:46 AM

Speaker2Animals: If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

And this is what passes for intelligence in the GOP.


.......and Obama the Imbecile is your hero?  Or have you "evolved?"
 
2013-03-30 02:28:03 AM
Somewhere there's a neurosurgeon strapped to an operating table wondering how his identity got mixed up with his patient.
 
2013-03-30 02:32:18 AM

Arumat: gingerjet: DrPainMD: "Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia..."

I haven't read this whole thread, but did anybody else notice that he didn't compare gay relationships to pedophilia?

So stating that one thing that is not bad and two things that are really bad and in no way related to the first thing in the same sentence is not making a comparison?  A reasonable person who say yes.

I'm going to have to disagree with you and say he did bring up pedophilia.  NAMBLA are a group of pedophiles, they just happen to be specifically male on male pedophiles.


I think you're responding to the wrong person.
 
2013-03-30 02:33:48 AM

armoredbulldozer: Speaker2Animals: If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

And this is what passes for intelligence in the GOP.

.......and Obama the Imbecile is your hero?  Or have you "evolved?"


Why would you think we hold elected officials as heroes? Oh, wait. You're a Republican.
 
2013-03-30 02:41:26 AM

Notabunny: I don't know about you, but I live in a basement and have no friends. Anonymously attacking internet strangers is as close to success as I'll ever get.


No joke, I have you Farkied as "makes detailed lists"
 
2013-03-30 02:43:48 AM

armoredbulldozer: .......and Obama the Imbecile is your hero?


I'd never hold any politician up as my personal hero.  But why exactly is Obama an imbecile?
 
2013-03-30 02:49:15 AM

Gawdzila: armoredbulldozer: .......and Obama the Imbecile is your hero?

I'd never hold any politician up as my personal hero.  But why exactly is Obama an imbecile?


Not just any imbecile.  He's the imbecile that made the GOP look REALLY STUPID in the last election finale.
 
2013-03-30 02:52:33 AM

CorporatePerson: Notabunny: I don't know about you, but I live in a basement and have no friends. Anonymously attacking internet strangers is as close to success as I'll ever get.

No joke, I have you Farkied as "makes detailed lists"


I don't recall revealing my superpower. I'll have to be more cautious. Thanks for the heads-up, citizen!
 
2013-03-30 02:57:38 AM
This man speaks truth to power, you are just too liberated to see!  When homosexual males are young and fantasizing about boys their age, they are committing pedophilia!
 
2013-03-30 03:02:35 AM

Notabunny: CorporatePerson: Notabunny: I don't know about you, but I live in a basement and have no friends. Anonymously attacking internet strangers is as close to success as I'll ever get.

No joke, I have you Farkied as "makes detailed lists"

I don't recall revealing my superpower. I'll have to be more cautious. Thanks for the heads-up, citizen!


FWIW I have you Farkied "Tom Waits fan".

/Also a fan of Mr Waits work.
 
2013-03-30 03:04:52 AM

quatchi: Kittypie070: ...vichyssoise.

I love it when you speak French!

DrPainMD: "Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia..."

I haven't read this whole thread, but did anybody else notice that he didn't compare gay relationships to pedophilia?

I culled the quote FTFA where he compared gays wanting the right to get legally married to NAMBLA

[wanting the right to legally marry] so I'm pretty sure you're full of shiat.

/5 posts above yours.


Nope. Looks like you're the one who's full of shiat. You don't seem to understand what's being compared.
 
2013-03-30 03:05:29 AM

DrPainMD: quatchi: Kittypie070: ...vichyssoise.

I love it when you speak French!

DrPainMD: "Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia..."

I haven't read this whole thread, but did anybody else notice that he didn't compare gay relationships to pedophilia?

I culled the quote FTFA where he compared gays wanting the right to get legally married to NAMBLA [wanting the right to legally marry] so I'm pretty sure you're full of shiat.

/5 posts above yours.

Nope. Looks like you're the one who's full of shiat. You don't seem to understand what's being compared.


Even tho you mention it, specifically, in your post.
 
2013-03-30 03:08:21 AM
If the organized religions want to not recognize gay marriage, fine, but the government shouldn't get into discriminating based on sexual preference. marriage as a government institution is all about benefits and taxes, not about religious tradition; it does not matter one farking bit to the IRS or Social Security Administration what gender everyone is, as long as they're paying their dues. We as a nation shouldn't be wasting time deciding who deserves what freedom when we've already established that all men (mankind includes women, pedants) are created equal.
 
2013-03-30 03:15:34 AM

DrPainMD: I culled the quote FTFA where he compared gays wanting the right to get legally married to NAMBLA [wanting the right to legally marry] so I'm pretty sure you're full of shiat.


NAMBLA want the right to marry kids now?

Comparing two groups who want to have sex with (ie. not marry) others who legally can not consent with consenting adult gays wanting to marry as all being equally worthy of scorn isn't an insulting and ignorant comparison all of a sudden?

Wow, you're full of shiat today.

Have you considered Metamucil? Ex-lax? Prune juice, perhaps?
 
2013-03-30 03:17:36 AM

quatchi: Have you considered Metamucil? Ex-lax? Prune juice, perhaps?


I'm not going to quote him, but I think we've found Dr Carson's Fark handle.
 
2013-03-30 03:17:47 AM

quatchi: NAMBLA want the right to marry kids now?

Comparing two groups who want to have sex with (ie. not marry) others who legally can not consent with consenting adult gays wanting to marry as all being equally worthy of scorn isn't an insulting and ignorant comparison all of a sudden?

Wow, you're full of shiat today.

Have you considered Metamucil? Ex-lax? Prune juice, perhaps?


You do realize you're being trolled, right?
 
2013-03-30 03:19:56 AM

quatchi: Notabunny: CorporatePerson: Notabunny: I don't know about you, but I live in a basement and have no friends. Anonymously attacking internet strangers is as close to success as I'll ever get.

No joke, I have you Farkied as "makes detailed lists"

I don't recall revealing my superpower. I'll have to be more cautious. Thanks for the heads-up, citizen!

FWIW I have you Farkied "Tom Waits fan".

/Also a fan of Mr Waits work.


It's funny how much we share about ourselves. I have you as "Enjoys music", but off the top of my head I don't remember why. Do you tune in to Soosh's show on Saturday nights?
 
2013-03-30 03:26:31 AM

Notabunny: Do you tune in to Soosh's show on Saturday nights?


Alaskan Farker Soosh from Juneau?

Never heard of the guy.

:D

/I keed but honestly no, I haven't. Wotsa deal?
//Mostly I listen to CBC's Saturday Night Blues Show on Saturday nights.
 
2013-03-30 03:28:45 AM

Biological Ali: You do realize you're being trolled, right?


Are you saying a Farker with a handle like that is something less than legit?

Well, I never!
 
2013-03-30 03:30:50 AM
Carson picked a bad week to get knee-deep into the political arena.....

In Supreme Court, anti-gay movement is humiliated
by Irin Carmon
Salon.com
March 28, 2013
 
2013-03-30 03:31:36 AM

Void_Beavis: After all, wasn't it lead plumbing that was a major contributing factor to the fall of the Romans?


Thats a possibility, but they used lead to for cookware, etc.
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/wine/leadpo is oning.html
 
2013-03-30 03:37:46 AM
Well, now I know who splurged on the good hashish today, right    error 303?
 
2013-03-30 03:39:27 AM
Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

Well, these must be Opposite Days, because in normal reality what he said and the "clever" way he said it should push him UP TO that perch.

Being an older black doctor doesn't automatically give you the wisdom of a Morgan Freeman character.
 
2013-03-30 03:39:37 AM

quatchi: Notabunny: Do you tune in to Soosh's show on Saturday nights?

Alaskan Farker Soosh from Juneau?

Never heard of the guy.

:D

/I keed but honestly no, I haven't. Wotsa deal?
//Mostly I listen to CBC's Saturday Night Blues Show on Saturday nights.


It's a pretty fun show. Little bit of everything. On Saturday afternoons I listen to Mick Martin's Blues Party on my local NPR station. (KXJZ Sacramento). Mick plays all types of blues, and introduced me to my current contemporary blues favorite, Keb Mo.
 
2013-03-30 03:41:42 AM

Huck And Molly Ziegler: Being an older black doctor doesn't automatically give you the wisdom of a Morgan Freeman character.


It may, however, cause one to read his statements in Morgan Freeman's voice.
 
2013-03-30 03:42:37 AM

Biological Ali: It may, however, cause one to read his statements in Morgan Freeman's voice.


Titty sprinkles.
 
2013-03-30 03:49:23 AM

Notabunny: Keb Mo.


Love KM.

Someone played me his version of Folsom Prison Blues last year and it blew me out of my socks.

/TYs fer linkage.
 
2013-03-30 03:50:06 AM
Never heard of the guy, but it certainly doesn't sound like I'm missing anything of value.
 
2013-03-30 03:56:58 AM
I didn't know NAMBLA and people into bestiality want to redefine marriage.

That's what he is saying with his fruit comparison, right?
 
2013-03-30 04:00:54 AM

Alphax: Never heard of the guy, but it certainly doesn't sound like I'm missing anything of value.


Here ya go
 
2013-03-30 04:02:58 AM

Internet Meme Rogers: SuperNinjaToad: If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange.

I am still trying to decipher this profound yet complex axiom.

Why would you say an orange that I just gave you is not an orange even if you asked for an apple? and how would a non orange orange become a peach afterward even though it may have been originally an apple all along? this is deep folks deep!!

Dr. Ben Carson has a lot to teach us about how to defend yourself from fresh fruit. What if a gay guy comes at you with a crate of raspberries?


Then I'd be sure he was only out to make me Belgian waffles.

/mmmmm, Belgian waffles
//Carbon Golden Malted flour is the BEST BELGIAN WAFFLE batter EVER IN THE HISTORY OF EVER!
 
2013-03-30 04:13:04 AM

ScaryBottles: randomjsa: So we're now up to "two days running"...

I said it would take a week for you to get around to whining about how hateful Republicans were after one of your own went on a bigoted little tirade to the cheer and adoration of more than a few.

It took you two days, and now we're on day three and you're doing it again. I should really learn to stop underestimating you people.

Incidentally that feeling of validation you have for catching this guy saying something unpopular in no way changes the fact that he's been handing you your rears on a silver platter on most of what you believe in.

Or really, I could just behave like you do when somebody is critical of Obama... You're obviously just a bunch of racists trying to keep a well spoken and intelligent black man down.

Oh and we haven't forgotten how "nicely" you treated the black actress for supporting Romney as the good and open minded liberals spewed racist hate speech at her.

But Carson said something bad, you go on, feel good about yourselves.

Ladies and gentlemen this what a dumb person sounds like when they try to be smug.


+1, would lol again.
 
2013-03-30 04:21:25 AM

Ennuipoet: gilgigamesh: The_Sponge: I like turtles.

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 273x412]



Depictions of incest are not appreciated! Ewww.....
 
2013-03-30 04:44:46 AM
www.frontroomcinema.com

/You really gotta question the thought process of people like this
 
2013-03-30 05:28:55 AM

TheJoe03: /You really gotta question the thought process of people like this


i47.tinypic.com
 
2013-03-30 05:31:57 AM
Yeah, pretty sure pedophilia's illegal because of the general rules of age of majority and mental competence to agree to contracts (there is, legally, an implicit contract involved in sexual contact with a number of legal responsibilities, like not giving an uninformed partner an STD and so on), and bestiality is illegal because of the inability of animals to sign contracts at all.

If you're making even an apples-to-oranges comparison, you're asserting similar reasoning, so the corollary of making this analogy is, since gay marriage/sex is illegal because of religion, that religious people shouldn't be allowed to sign contracts or do related things like, say, vote.

Which... nah, actually, I'm cool with that.  No gay marriage, but suffrage from now on is denied to religious people on grounds of lack of mental competence, and if you're religious you need the court to assign you a guardian with power of attourney to manage your affairs.  Reasonable trade-off.
 
2013-03-30 05:40:14 AM

Jim_Callahan: Yeah, pretty sure pedophilia's illegal because of the general rules of age of majority and mental competence to agree to contracts (there is, legally, an implicit contract involved in sexual contact with a number of legal responsibilities, like not giving an uninformed partner an STD and so on), and bestiality is illegal because of the inability of animals to sign contracts at all.


Yep, just like with the stupid animal marriage analogy they use, it fails to pass the "consenting adult" test. Perhaps I shouldn't give these morans advice but they should just use the polygamy comparison. I'm socially libertarian, so I personally I have issue with polygamy (one dude and multiple ladies, one lady and multiple men, or even a hodgepodge of the genders) but it still isn't a popular opinion while at the same time it has to do with societal definitions of marriage between consenting adults.
 
2013-03-30 05:41:53 AM

shotglasss: Carson is right, even though he may have been a bit ineloquent.


0.5/10

At least you tried.
 
2013-03-30 05:45:16 AM

Raharu: At least you tried.


Wait, the white supremacist called a black guy "Ineloquent"? Hah. Next up will be "He's not so well-spoken, but he's one of the good ones."
 
2013-03-30 05:46:10 AM

Huck And Molly Ziegler: Being an older black doctor doesn't automatically give you the wisdom of a Morgan Freeman character.


No, but it does give the GOP crowd something to point at and say, "See? We love black people!" Yes, I know that all Republicans aren't racist. But as an institution they've worked against non-whites. Facts is facts, and no individual high-profile black guy like Herman Cain or this numbnut will change that.
 
2013-03-30 06:09:01 AM

TheJoe03: I'm socially libertarian, so I personally I have NOissue with polygamy


FTFM
 
2013-03-30 06:17:30 AM

Kittypie070: Gyrfalcon: Kittypie070: Deep thoughts concerning yogurt

[i.imgur.com image 600x450]

But is it fruit yogurt? I like fruit yogurt.

I have the feeling it's some Scandinavian-area clabbered dairy product.


It's cat yogurt.

/Cat on the top, so you don't have to stir.
 
2013-03-30 06:41:25 AM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

i560.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-30 06:43:03 AM

Fluorescent Testicle: quatchi: Have you considered Metamucil? Ex-lax? Prune juice, perhaps?

I'm not going to quote him, but I think we've found Dr Carson's Fark handle.


Where did I say I agree with him? I was just pointing out that he didn't say what subby, the article, and almost every post in this thread say he said. Anybody who says otherwise doesn't understand the English language on a 3rd grade level. It's not a matter of opinion. Feel free to criticize him for what he did say, but don't criticize him for what he didn't say.
 
2013-03-30 06:45:45 AM

DrPainMD: I was just pointing out that he didn't say what subby, the article, and almost every post in this thread say he said. Anybody who says otherwise doesn't I don't understand the English language on a 3rd grade level.


Fixed.
 
2013-03-30 06:48:34 AM
That was a poor choice of words.  He should have just said "Any group does not get to determine society's definition of that group" which is what I think he was trying to say and left it at that without mentioning nambla or bestiality.
 
2013-03-30 06:53:04 AM

quatchi: DrPainMD: I culled the quote FTFA where he compared gays wanting the right to get legally married to NAMBLA [wanting the right to legally marry] so I'm pretty sure you're full of shiat.

NAMBLA want the right to marry kids now?


He didn't say that, either. The sentence wasn't that complicated; no big words or anything. How is it that you don't understand it? Here, I'll repeat it in total:

"My thoughts are that marriage is between a man and a woman. It's a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality-it doesn't matter what they are-they don't get to change the definition."

Nowhere does he say that NAMBLA wants to get married, nor does he compare NAMBLA members to gays. It's not there.

Comparing two groups who want to have sex with (ie. not marry) others who legally can not consent with consenting adult gays wanting to marry as all being equally worthy of scorn isn't an insulting and ignorant comparison all of a sudden?

Where in the above quote does he compare them, or even make the slightest hint of claiming any similarity between the two groups? It's not there.

Wow, you're full of shiat today.

No, you're still the one who's full of it.
 
2013-03-30 06:54:58 AM

quatchi: DrPainMD: I was just pointing out that he didn't say what subby, the article, and almost every post in this thread say he said. Anybody who says otherwise doesn't I don't understand the English language on a 3rd grade level.

Fixed.


quatchi: DrPainMD: I was just pointing out that he didn't say what subby, the article, and almost every post in this thread say he said. Anybody who says otherwise doesn't I don't understand the English language on a 3rd grade level.

Fixed.


OK, specifically where does he compare gays to NAMBLA members or say that NAMBLA members want the right to marry?
 
2013-03-30 06:56:49 AM

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: That was a poor choice of words.  He should have just said "Any group does not get to determine society's definition of that group" which is what I think he was trying to say and left it at that without mentioning nambla or bestiality.


Exactly.
 
2013-03-30 07:02:02 AM

DrPainMD: Nowhere does he say that NAMBLA wants to get married, nor does he compare NAMBLA members to gays. It's not there.


You said that, dumbshiat, in the post you just quoted.

Gawd, yer thicker than the proverbial brick aren't you?

You are either a troll or incapable of intellectual honesty or simple reading comprehension.
 
2013-03-30 07:07:05 AM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

Doc, if you want to be a contender in the Republican party, you're gonna have to learn to slight a much higher quality bullshiat.
 
2013-03-30 07:13:16 AM

quatchi: DrPainMD: Nowhere does he say that NAMBLA wants to get married, nor does he compare NAMBLA members to gays. It's not there.

You said that, dumbshiat, in the post you just quoted.

Gawd, yer thicker than the proverbial brick aren't you?

You are either a troll or incapable of intellectual honesty or simple reading comprehension.


I most certainly didn't. What Dr. Carson said, and I was merely pointing out, is that he believes that those groups shouldn't get to decide the definition of marriage. Which is what he said. In plain, simple, English. And that's ALL he said. Nothing more.
 
2013-03-30 07:15:26 AM

DrPainMD: quatchi: DrPainMD: Nowhere does he say that NAMBLA wants to get married, nor does he compare NAMBLA members to gays. It's not there.

You said that, dumbshiat, in the post you just quoted.

Gawd, yer thicker than the proverbial brick aren't you?

You are either a troll or incapable of intellectual honesty or simple reading comprehension.

I most certainly didn't. What Dr. Carson said, and I was merely pointing out, is that he believes that those groups shouldn't get to decide the definition of marriage. Which is what he said. In plain, simple, English. And that's ALL he said. Nothing more.


So why does he compare gays wanting to get married to bestiality and NAMBLA?
 
2013-03-30 07:17:36 AM
BTW for the sake of discussion, here is the actual quote:

 "My thoughts are that marriage is between a man and a woman. It's a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality-it doesn't matter what they are-they don't get to change the definition."
 
2013-03-30 07:21:12 AM

Mrtraveler01: DrPainMD: quatchi: DrPainMD: Nowhere does he say that NAMBLA wants to get married, nor does he compare NAMBLA members to gays. It's not there.

You said that, dumbshiat, in the post you just quoted.

Gawd, yer thicker than the proverbial brick aren't you?

You are either a troll or incapable of intellectual honesty or simple reading comprehension.

I most certainly didn't. What Dr. Carson said, and I was merely pointing out, is that he believes that those groups shouldn't get to decide the definition of marriage. Which is what he said. In plain, simple, English. And that's ALL he said. Nothing more.

So why does he compare gays wanting to get married to bestiality and NAMBLA?


Read the quote again. He's not comparing them, he's saying that he thinks that they shouldn't get to decide the definition of marriage. That's ALL he said. Read it.
 
2013-03-30 07:23:16 AM

DrPainMD: Mrtraveler01: DrPainMD: quatchi: DrPainMD: Nowhere does he say that NAMBLA wants to get married, nor does he compare NAMBLA members to gays. It's not there.

You said that, dumbshiat, in the post you just quoted.

Gawd, yer thicker than the proverbial brick aren't you?

You are either a troll or incapable of intellectual honesty or simple reading comprehension.

I most certainly didn't. What Dr. Carson said, and I was merely pointing out, is that he believes that those groups shouldn't get to decide the definition of marriage. Which is what he said. In plain, simple, English. And that's ALL he said. Nothing more.

So why does he compare gays wanting to get married to bestiality and NAMBLA?

Read the quote again. He's not comparing them, he's saying that he thinks that they shouldn't get to decide the definition of marriage. That's ALL he said. Read it.


I did, he said it all under the same breath which usually implies that they're all in one group. Why does he compare gays wanting to get married to people like NAMBLA wanting to marry young boys or beastiality people wanting to marry their animals?

Now it is possible that Dr. Carson just sucks at communicating, in that case, you would probably be correct.
 
2013-03-30 07:29:44 AM

Mrtraveler01: DrPainMD: Mrtraveler01: DrPainMD: quatchi: DrPainMD: Nowhere does he say that NAMBLA wants to get married, nor does he compare NAMBLA members to gays. It's not there.

You said that, dumbshiat, in the post you just quoted.

Gawd, yer thicker than the proverbial brick aren't you?

You are either a troll or incapable of intellectual honesty or simple reading comprehension.

I most certainly didn't. What Dr. Carson said, and I was merely pointing out, is that he believes that those groups shouldn't get to decide the definition of marriage. Which is what he said. In plain, simple, English. And that's ALL he said. Nothing more.

So why does he compare gays wanting to get married to bestiality and NAMBLA?

Read the quote again. He's not comparing them, he's saying that he thinks that they shouldn't get to decide the definition of marriage. That's ALL he said. Read it.

I did, he said it all under the same breath which usually implies that they're all in one group. Why does he compare gays wanting to get married to people like NAMBLA wanting to marry young boys or beastiality people wanting to marry their animals?

Now it is possible that Dr. Carson just sucks at communicating, in that case, you would probably be correct.


He said it in plain, simple English, and he implied nothing. You inferred something that wasn't there. That's not a failure on his part; it's a failure on your part.
 
2013-03-30 07:32:35 AM

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: He should have just said "Any group does not get to determine society's definition of that group" which is what I think he was trying to say and left it at that without mentioning nambla or bestiality.


Any group?

It's not just gays who think gay people deserve to be treated like equals.

For the longest time bigots outnumbered gays and their political allies but the times they are a'changing.

If you want to stay on the wrong side of morality, justice and history that's your right just like it's my right to come onto an anonymous internet forum and point and laugh at you till you STFU or have an epiphany.

K?

/Also, although you are probably unaware you are just making the same arguments anti-race mixing bigots were making back in the 60s if you just substitute "gays wanting to marry" with "blacks wanting to marry whites".
//Didn't work then and it aint gonna work now but go on make an ass of yourself. It amuses me to see you fail.
///My other hobbies include watching moths bump their heads on light bulbs till they fall to the ground.
 
2013-03-30 07:32:40 AM

DrPainMD: Mrtraveler01: DrPainMD: Mrtraveler01: DrPainMD: quatchi: DrPainMD: Nowhere does he say that NAMBLA wants to get married, nor does he compare NAMBLA members to gays. It's not there.

You said that, dumbshiat, in the post you just quoted.

Gawd, yer thicker than the proverbial brick aren't you?

You are either a troll or incapable of intellectual honesty or simple reading comprehension.

I most certainly didn't. What Dr. Carson said, and I was merely pointing out, is that he believes that those groups shouldn't get to decide the definition of marriage. Which is what he said. In plain, simple, English. And that's ALL he said. Nothing more.

So why does he compare gays wanting to get married to bestiality and NAMBLA?

Read the quote again. He's not comparing them, he's saying that he thinks that they shouldn't get to decide the definition of marriage. That's ALL he said. Read it.

I did, he said it all under the same breath which usually implies that they're all in one group. Why does he compare gays wanting to get married to people like NAMBLA wanting to marry young boys or beastiality people wanting to marry their animals?

Now it is possible that Dr. Carson just sucks at communicating, in that case, you would probably be correct.

He said it in plain, simple English, and he implied nothing. You inferred something that wasn't there. That's not a failure on his part; it's a failure on your part.


So why mention NAMBLA and bestiality at all if his central message was that gays shouldn't get married?
 
2013-03-30 07:33:53 AM

Mrtraveler01: So why mention NAMBLA and bestiality at all if his central message was that gays shouldn't get married?


You'd have to ask him that one.
 
2013-03-30 07:34:12 AM

DrPainMD: He's not comparing them


Yes he is and the comparison is invalid on every level.
 
2013-03-30 07:38:01 AM

DrPainMD: Mrtraveler01: So why mention NAMBLA and bestiality at all if his central message was that gays shouldn't get married?

You'd have to ask him that one.


Don't you think that if he was a smart guy, then mentioning NAMBLA and bestiality at all in this gay marriage debate would've elicited a negative reaction and probably not worth bringing up?

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he was just being a dumbass and not trying to compare gays to NAMBLA/bestiality.
 
2013-03-30 07:48:43 AM

Mrtraveler01: DrPainMD: Mrtraveler01: So why mention NAMBLA and bestiality at all if his central message was that gays shouldn't get married?

You'd have to ask him that one.

Don't you think that if he was a smart guy, then mentioning NAMBLA and bestiality at all in this gay marriage debate would've elicited a negative reaction and probably not worth bringing up?

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he was just being a dumbass and not trying to compare gays to NAMBLA/bestiality.


No doubt it was a stupid thing to say. Even stupider is to say it while claiming to be a conservative. The conservative position (as opposed to the Republican [i.e., not conservative] position) on marriage is that the government is merely a keeper of records, and who marries whom is a private matter left to free people. As long as society gives certain advantages (tax breaks, benefits, etc.) to people who are married, then any two-or-more consenting adults have the basic human right to get married if they so choose.
 
2013-03-30 08:01:10 AM

Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems


It's not that flat taxes can't work, but rather that the plans we usually see claim to be our solution yet never bother to actually do the math. It seems like these guys just pick a percent that sounds good and run with it.

In the absence of spending cuts, lowering one person's taxes means you have to raise somebody else's.
 
2013-03-30 08:02:49 AM

DrPainMD: The conservative position (as opposed to the Republican [i.e., not conservative] position) on marriage is that the government is merely a keeper of records, and who marries whom is a private matter left to free people.


That doesn't make sense, care to clarify? Conservatives are traditionalists that support the old institutions, so how does it make sense that their view on marriage would support gay marriage in any way?  This is a social issue, so the the kind of conservatism that is relevant to this topic would be the social kind. Maybe you mean libertarian.
 
2013-03-30 08:04:25 AM
You seem to be talking about classical liberalism. That can be seen as conservative (economically) compared to modern liberalism, so maybe you meant that.
 
2013-03-30 08:13:24 AM

garron: Liberal McCarthyism is in full effect.


Yup. McCarthyism was nothing but pointing and laughing when someone made word salad after making an ass out of themselves with statements. Truly, he is being hounded neigh unto death, his very living threatened by standing up to powers beyond his ken, for simply speaking "the truth."1

1 Of course, when I say "truth" that translates to "Previous word salad that I now would like to equivocate upon because I realize that I am no longer surrounded by dopes who I have to pander to, yet am unable to back away from the precipice of because for too long I have stared into the yawning Abyss of ignorance and intellectual dishonesty, that I have made petition of them, and that Abyss has scarred my soul, deeply cut into the cordage of my moral fiber, and now must bow to the mighty tide of ignorance and rage that has touched me, and made all my hopes and dreams seem petty in comparison."
 
2013-03-30 08:14:37 AM

Silly Jesus: RyogaM: Silly Jesus: Oh, I didn't get that that was your point. I'm not locked in to the 10%...I just liked the flat tax idea. I was just throwing a number out there.

Everyone was arguing that The Math Did Not Add Up.  That's an argument against a 10% flat tax, not the tax itself.

Being for a Flat Tax without mentioning a rate that is actually mathematically realistic is like being for Free hookers and Blow for everyone, without saying how you pay for it.  It's asinine.  Like Doc. Carson.

Usually libs argue against the flat tax on the basis of "the poors will have to pay as much (percentage wise) as the wealthy, and that's not faaaaaaiiiiiiiirrrrrr."  I was caught off guard.


As a guy in the 28% bracket now, call me when we decide to put people like Romney pay that same flat tax rate. Color me suspicious but I am sure the Cayman islands crowd will continue to avoid paying their share.
 
2013-03-30 08:16:23 AM

TheJoe03: DrPainMD: The conservative position (as opposed to the Republican [i.e., not conservative] position) on marriage is that the government is merely a keeper of records, and who marries whom is a private matter left to free people.

That doesn't make sense, care to clarify? Conservatives are traditionalists that support the old institutions, so how does it make sense that their view on marriage would support gay marriage in any way?  This is a social issue, so the the kind of conservatism that is relevant to this topic would be the social kind. Maybe you mean libertarian.


Libertarians are the only conservatives left. Republicans certainly aren't conservative. On this issue, they are no better than the Progressives who brought us laws against interracial marriage.
 
2013-03-30 08:17:07 AM

Mrtraveler01: garron: Liberal McCarthyism is in full effect.

Wait, how is this liberal McCarthyism again?


I have a list. And in this list it has all the names of republicans that are going to say something racist, sexist (or rapey) or homophobic between now and 2016.

Spoiler: This list contains everyone that is a member of the RNC.

;)
 
2013-03-30 08:17:47 AM
Homosexuality is no more or less deviant than the others, it's just not illegal because it's an act that can be engaged with the consent of two adult humans.   Of course you people need to silence anyone mentioning this or any other valid comparison on the national stage, because you can't have anyone get in the way of your efforts to conflate 'legal' with 'moral'.   If you were in the right, you wouldn't need such organized efforts to silence your opponents anyone who isn't in lockstep agreement with you.
 
2013-03-30 08:17:59 AM

quatchi: DrPainMD: He's not comparing them

Yes he is and the comparison is invalid on every level.


scottberkun.com
 
2013-03-30 08:19:30 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Homosexuality is no more or less deviant than the others, it's just not illegal because it's an act that can be engaged with the consent of two adult humans.


You know what else is equally as deviant, adultery and sex outside of marriage.

When we start people those people's head on a pike, then there can be a moral high ground.
 
2013-03-30 08:21:11 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Of course you people need to silence anyone mentioning this or any other valid comparison on the national stage, because you can't have anyone get in the way of your efforts to conflate 'legal' with 'moral'.   If you were in the right, you wouldn't need such organized efforts to silence your opponents anyone who isn't in lockstep agreement with you.


You poor delicate flower you.

People though interracial marriages were just as deviant back in the day, deviance is a matter of opinion and not actually based on anything concrete.
 
2013-03-30 08:24:57 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Homosexuality is no more or less deviant than the others, it's just not illegal because it's an act that can be engaged with the consent of two adult humans.   Of course you people need to silence anyone mentioning this or any other valid comparison on the national stage, because you can't have anyone get in the way of your efforts to conflate 'legal' with 'moral'.   If you were in the right, you wouldn't need such organized efforts to silence your opponents anyone who isn't in lockstep agreement with you.


Pointing and laughing at people with views on sexuality from the Middle Ages is not silencing them. Such people have been getting quite a bit of attention lately, actually. It's just that people aren't afraid to tell people like you to fark off when they judge what other adults do in the bedroom.

Sir, go fark yourself.
 
2013-03-30 08:25:21 AM

Mrtraveler01: When we start people those people's head on a pike, then there can be a moral high ground.


Because getting heads put on pikes is a reality of being gay, right?

Mrtraveler01: People though interracial marriages were just as deviant back in the day, deviance is a matter of opinion and not actually based on anything concrete.


2 posts to the same thing in a row? Did you forget to change your alt?  Btw, black is a race, homosexuality is an act, they're not remotely the same thing.
 
2013-03-30 08:25:51 AM

DrPainMD: No doubt it was a stupid thing to say. Even stupider is to say it while claiming to be a conservative. The conservative position (as opposed to the Republican [i.e., not conservative] position) on marriage is that the government is merely a keeper of records, and who marries whom is a private matter left to free people. As long as society gives certain advantages (tax breaks, benefits, etc.) to people who are married, then any two-or-more consenting adults have the basic human right to get married if they so choose.


You know, you make sense here. If the government is involved in marriage it needs to recognize any two adults of proper age. Our choices are to grant those benefits to all able to enter a contract, or to get out of the business altogether. None of this is rocket surgery, yet here we are as a nation basting in emotional arguments rather than approaching the issue rationally.

Your remark about the conservative position is what we libtards have been saying for years. The only "small gubmit" that 'conservatives' enjoy is the one that appeases Job Creators (blessed be thy name). When it comes down to brass tacks and your body, they want control. Some Democrats want to force sugars and fats from school lunches; some 'conservatives' want a government so small it fits in your anus. I think both of you look ridiculous.

/bsabsvr
//libtard
 
2013-03-30 08:25:51 AM

quatchi: Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: He should have just said "Any group does not get to determine society's definition of that group" which is what I think he was trying to say and left it at that without mentioning nambla or bestiality.

Any group?

It's not just gays who think gay people deserve to be treated like equals.

For the longest time bigots outnumbered gays and their political allies but the times they are a'changing.

If you want to stay on the wrong side of morality, justice and history that's your right just like it's my right to come onto an anonymous internet forum and point and laugh at you till you STFU or have an epiphany.

K?

/Also, although you are probably unaware you are just making the same arguments anti-race mixing bigots were making back in the 60s if you just substitute "gays wanting to marry" with "blacks wanting to marry whites".
//Didn't work then and it aint gonna work now but go on make an ass of yourself. It amuses me to see you fail.
///My other hobbies include watching moths bump their heads on light bulbs till they fall to the ground.


I apologize for my own poor choice of words, but you could have been nicer about in pointing out my mistake.  It's like the difference between asking nicely and demanding with a bad attitude.

Now I'm wondering since society can be wrong in defining a group (bigots defining gays and racial minorities) and a group can be wrong in defining their own selves (moral crusaders who think they're saving society from chaos), who or what defines a group and how does one go about it to ensure a correct definition?
 
2013-03-30 08:27:07 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mrtraveler01: When we start people those people's head on a pike, then there can be a moral high ground.

Because getting heads put on pikes is a reality of being gay, right?

Mrtraveler01: People though interracial marriages were just as deviant back in the day, deviance is a matter of opinion and not actually based on anything concrete.

2 posts to the same thing in a row? Did you forget to change your alt?  Btw, black is a race, homosexuality is an act, they're not remotely the same thing.


They were both viewed as deviant practices during their respective time.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mrtraveler01: When we start people those people's head on a pike, then there can be a moral high ground.

Because getting heads put on pikes is a reality of being gay, right?

Mrtraveler01: People though interracial marriages were just as deviant back in the day, deviance is a matter of opinion and not actually based on anything concrete.

2 posts to the same thing in a row? Did you forget to change your alt?  Btw, black is a race, homosexuality is an act, they're not remotely the same thing.


So how come people who have sex outside of marriage don't get treated with the same scorn that gay people do?
 
2013-03-30 08:29:19 AM

Zeno-25: Pointing and laughing at people with views on sexuality from the Middle Ages is not silencing them. Such people have been getting quite a bit of attention lately, actually. It's just that people aren't afraid to tell people like you to fark off when they judge what other adults do in the bedroom.


So naturally the rest of us can point and laugh at people who think farking an orifice that expels babies is no less valid as farking an orifice that expels feces.  Fair enough.
 
2013-03-30 08:36:44 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Zeno-25: Pointing and laughing at people with views on sexuality from the Middle Ages is not silencing them. Such people have been getting quite a bit of attention lately, actually. It's just that people aren't afraid to tell people like you to fark off when they judge what other adults do in the bedroom.

So naturally the rest of us can point and laugh at people who think farking an orifice that expels babies is no less valid as farking an orifice that expels feces.  Fair enough.


Which has what exclusively to do with homosexuality, exactly? Plenty of hetero people like to take the Hershey highway route too. At least the ones without views on sexuality from a few centuries ago.
 
2013-03-30 08:37:57 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: So naturally the rest of us can point and laugh at people who think farking an orifice that expels babies is no less valid as farking an orifice that expels feces.  Fair enough.


Most straight guys love taking the occasional dirt road. If I like doing to a woman (beg for it, in fact), I don't see how a gay man thinks any differently. It's a hole. It's tight. Sometimes it's a mess but, c'mon, so is a vagina. You ever taken a good look at that thing? It's an hatchet wound that bleeds 25% of the time.
 
2013-03-30 08:42:05 AM
BTW: You know what else is a deviant act? Eating Shellfish.

Leviticus 11:9-12
 
2013-03-30 08:45:02 AM
Oh, for fark's sake. Anybody who says it's legally impossible to have consensual sex with an animal has obviously never met a horny bull mastiff. Let me tell you something: you get a horny bull mastiff humping your leg, you let the farker finish.
 
2013-03-30 08:45:59 AM
Found a pic of BraveNewCheneyWorld:

cdn.front.moveon.org
 
2013-03-30 08:59:18 AM

Mrtraveler01: BTW: You know what else is a deviant act? Eating Shellfish.

Leviticus 11:9-12


Don't bother; this guy's either just doing a (pretty poor) satire of conservative bigotry or is just a regular douche doing it for whatever stupid kicks people get from trolling.

I mean, even the guy who actually made the NAMBLA/bestiality comments had the sense to at least try to walk them back. Nobody with enough sense to use internet actually believes what this troll is saying.
 
2013-03-30 09:03:45 AM
Mrtraveler01: Yeah but there are states too!

States work the same way countries do right?


Unfortunately I live not far from Alabama, Louisiana and Texas, so I have to say Yes.

/failed countries
 
2013-03-30 09:16:29 AM

Mrtraveler01: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Homosexuality is no more or less deviant than the others, it's just not illegal because it's an act that can be engaged with the consent of two adult humans.

You know what else is equally as deviant, adultery and sex outside of marriage.

When we start people those people's head on a pike, then there can be a moral high ground.


Mrtraveler01: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Of course you people need to silence anyone mentioning this or any other valid comparison on the national stage, because you can't have anyone get in the way of your efforts to conflate 'legal' with 'moral'.   If you were in the right, you wouldn't need such organized efforts to silence your opponents anyone who isn't in lockstep agreement with you.

You poor delicate flower you.

People though interracial marriages were just as deviant back in the day, deviance is a matter of opinion and not actually based on anything concrete.


Deviance is NOT an entirely invalid description. At least, in the sociological sense of normative behaviors in large population groups. Of course, within many cultures, this deviance, as in behavior that differs from the majority, doesn't always carry the same hostility towards it that it does in some cultures. That we see vehemence against it in some sub-cultures, and acceptance in others, that is likewise about those populations norms.

In Provincetown, gay and lesbians are not quite in the same minority status. Numbers-wise, they are in the minority, but represented with far greater numbers and as a higher percentage of the populace, their behavior is not seen in the same light. Deviant, in that is not the hetronormative that is pervasive, but socially accepted deviance. Deviance in the sociological standpoint of being different from the norm, but carrying no proscription. Other sub-cultures and communities, it is not only deviant, but proscripted by the larger populace.

Deviance, in the sociological sense, happens in all populations. It is, in fact, natural. Deviance from norms occurs, and has a role in our social behavior. Some behaviors are frowned upon. Some are simply different from the norm, and accepted as just folks being folks. Some are considered minor hiccups, and their disruption is seen as merely being gauche--say, wearing white after Labor Day, or having a fondness for ripping farts in public and calling attention to them--and some are seen as disrupting normal social give and take. Merely being deviant from the norm doesn't necessarily mean, in the sociological sense, that these are bad things. Helping strangers in a park after a mugging, is often deviant behavior. It flies in the face of normal behaviors, and is rewarded, as this form of deviance reinforces the mores of society. Charity and extreme compassion are likewise deviant from the norms, but as they reinforce mores, they are seen as good forms of deviance. Deviance, alone, is not a bad thing. We have behaviors that often fall between the accepted, the unacceptable, and those that reinforce ideals. The deviance from these norms is natural, and deviance in a society is a function of society working.

Mind you, our Beamish Boy wasn't using this descriptor for his definition of deviance, but it is, I think, important to put things in context. Because mores do change. What is acceptable and what is not changes as societies progress, they mix with other cultures, as they mature, as needs impact the population. Morality changes as time goes on. What we are seeing, are those who hold a form of morality witnessing the mores of the larger society shifting, and as they have had a lock on what these mores should be, they see this shifting as an attack upon themselves. This is a natural outgrowth of societies with populations with differing forces working upon them.

What is fun here, is that folks who profess to hold certain mores to be in higher esteem than others, are latching onto an issue as being indicative of the "permissiveness" of society. That the old values don't matter as much. And in a way, they ARE entirely correct. What is interesting is that the very values that they claim to hold dear--family, faith, charity, fidelity--often fall to the wayside when it comes to one of their own sub-culture, and those that they see as other. It is a way of attacking a perceived threat to their values, without having to actually look at their own too closely, because that might reveal some startling truths. That they themselves have not "kept the faith" as it were, in keeping their own houses clean, so to speak. Instead, it's easier and safer to point to the outside forces, that are "tearing society apart" because a deeper look, is a bit too close for comfort. It might reveal that they themselves have deviated from the very mores that they tend to hold in higher esteem, as well as those that they tend to vilify. So long as it is others, who are the threat to norms, then they can safely rage, and pat themselves on the back for being stolid watchdogs. It is likewise normal. All societies have these features built in. We social apes LOVE to keep our troop mates in line, while those closest to us get a bit of a pass. Up until a point. The issue within the issue of marriage equality, is that this smaller grouping would like to impose its mores upon the whole, including populations far outside their own scope. They are looking to use whatever means and justification to acquire and keep power, the outward behaviors seemingly far more important than the deeper and core values. This is normal, but not entirely in keeping with spirit of the documents that they tend to invoke. In part, because they are merely looking to distract and acquire and keep power, as opposed to truly being concerned. It is less about morality, than it is about face.

And that is part of it right there. We are shifting more and more into face based culture. Outward appearance and reputation are important. Even bankable in social context. Value is determined by reputation. So long as you can keep face, then you can act in private all sorts of a'fool, and yet, still carry that reputation. Mind you, we are shifting from a responsibility based culture to more of a face based culture, because of the mechanics of communication, and a mixing of cultures. The monoculture is increasingly pressing upon us. Many would like to be in control of that monoculture, and crush any and all competition, and thus we are seeing some of the issues we have as late. Less and less about duty and responsibility, than what reputation has been secured by actions. Even actions that fly in the face of many folks' values, so long as they serve the monoculture, are seen as enhancing reputation. Yes, being a "Maverick" is deviance, but in many of the sub-cultures, that is not a bad thing. If that deviance serves the greater mores. What is odd, is that we are not quite to a face based culture yet, and folks are still trying to play to both these reputation based systems, as well as hearken back to a more responsibility based culture to give themselves a feeling of rootedness in society. And it is a sometimes rocky transition, as we have seen in the last fifty years or so.

So, yes, we can point and laugh when folks make asses of themselves, because they are negotiating these somewhat tricky waters, because what we are in fact doing, is establishing what is normative, and feeling out as a society what we will and will not accept, and those who are seeking to establish more face, must decide if they want to increase their reputation with the larger culture, or sub-cultures. What we are in fact doing when we point and laugh at the ridiculous is establishing the very norms that folks will then have to decide if they will then deviate from themselves, and for what reasons that they will do so. We saw in the last election, folks seeking to establish face within subcultures, and the election proved to them that less folks found that pandering to be seen as less effective for leadership. We will continue to see how this plays out. It's not a "culture war" but we ARE in the midst of cultural shift, and some folks REALLY don't like it, because it may force them out of the firmly entrenched holes that they've dug in, and cross lines in the sand that they've boldly drawn, in order to establish their reputations...
 
2013-03-30 09:19:24 AM

CorporatePerson: Pretty much every Republican I know has assured me at one time or another that Obama only got elected president because he's black.


That happens when they were told for a year the only reason they didn't vote for him was that they were racist.
 
2013-03-30 09:20:22 AM

ALL GIRLS AGREE TO PULL PANTIES DOWN: Mrtraveler01: DrPainMD: Mrtraveler01: So why mention NAMBLA and bestiality at all if his central message was that gays shouldn't get married?

You'd have to ask him that one.

Don't you think that if he was a smart guy, then mentioning NAMBLA and bestiality at all in this gay marriage debate would've elicited a negative reaction and probably not worth bringing up?

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he was just being a dumbass and not trying to compare gays to NAMBLA/bestiality.


"The are a lot of people who were upset with Barack Obama being re-elected.  The Aryan Brotherhood, Neo-Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Republican Party.  If you infer that I was implying the GOP has a similar motive to the other three, you're just reading way too much into it."


Good job.

"There are a lot of people who want to use the government to curtail the rights of gays.  Nazis, small-minded Muslim and Christian fundamentalists like the Westboro Baptists and the Republican party.  If you think I am implying that the Republicans have the same irrational hatred of gays as Nazis and Muslim terrorists, you're just reading too much into it."
 
2013-03-30 09:21:26 AM

hubiestubert: Mrtraveler01: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Homosexuality is no more or less deviant than the others, it's just not illegal because it's an act that can be engaged with the consent of two adult humans.

You know what else is equally as deviant, adultery and sex outside of marriage.

When we start people those people's head on a pike, then there can be a moral high ground.

Mrtraveler01: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Of course you people need to silence anyone mentioning this or any other valid comparison on the national stage, because you can't have anyone get in the way of your efforts to conflate 'legal' with 'moral'.   If you were in the right, you wouldn't need such organized efforts to silence your opponents anyone who isn't in lockstep agreement with you.

You poor delicate flower you.

People though interracial marriages were just as deviant back in the day, deviance is a matter of opinion and not actually based on anything concrete.

Deviance is NOT an entirely invalid description. At least, in the sociological sense of normative behaviors in large population groups. Of course, within many cultures, this deviance, as in behavior that differs from the majority, doesn't always carry the same hostility towards it that it does in some cultures. That we see vehemence against it in some sub-cultures, and acceptance in others, that is likewise about those populations norms.

In Provincetown, gay and lesbians are not quite in the same minority status. Numbers-wise, they are in the minority, but represented with far greater numbers and as a higher percentage of the populace, their behavior is not seen in the same light. Deviant, in that is not the hetronormative that is pervasive, but socially accepted deviance. Deviance in the sociological standpoint of being different from the norm, but carrying no proscription. Other sub-cultures and communities, it is not only deviant, but proscripted by the larger populace.

Deviance, in the sociological sense, happens in all populations. It is, ...


That is perhaps one of the most intelligent posts I've seen on Fark.
 
2013-03-30 09:22:33 AM

hubiestubert: Deviance is NOT an entirely invalid description.


Well sure; interracial marriages remain "deviant" even after decades of complete legality, because most people still end up marrying others of the same race as them.
 
2013-03-30 09:25:47 AM

dickfreckle: DrPainMD: No doubt it was a stupid thing to say. Even stupider is to say it while claiming to be a conservative. The conservative position (as opposed to the Republican [i.e., not conservative] position) on marriage is that the government is merely a keeper of records, and who marries whom is a private matter left to free people. As long as society gives certain advantages (tax breaks, benefits, etc.) to people who are married, then any two-or-more consenting adults have the basic human right to get married if they so choose.

You know, you make sense here. If the government is involved in marriage it needs to recognize any two adults of proper age. Our choices are to grant those benefits to all able to enter a contract, or to get out of the business altogether. None of this is rocket surgery, yet here we are as a nation basting in emotional arguments rather than approaching the issue rationally.

Your remark about the conservative position is what we libtards have been saying for years. The only "small gubmit" that 'conservatives' enjoy is the one that appeases Job Creators (blessed be thy name). When it comes down to brass tacks and your body, they want control. Some Democrats want to force sugars and fats from school lunches; some 'conservatives' want a government so small it fits in your anus. I think both of you look ridiculous.

/bsabsvr
//libtard


Ohhhh....can I steal that phrase?
 
2013-03-30 09:41:16 AM

Kittypie070: Ohhhh....can I steal that phrase?


Kittypie, everything I own belongs to you!

/except my dog
 
2013-03-30 09:43:11 AM

Kittypie070: Deep thoughts concerning yogurt


D'awwwww!

Nice palate cleanser.

/Sending you virtual catnip and skritchies
 
2013-03-30 09:43:48 AM

Biological Ali: hubiestubert: Deviance is NOT an entirely invalid description.

Well sure; interracial marriages remain "deviant" even after decades of complete legality, because most people still end up marrying others of the same race as them.


True. I wanted to put "deviance" into perspective. I don't think our Beamish Cheney exactly thinks in that fashion, nor even has a solid concept of mores and values, at least in that larger and more expansive concept, but his argument is a symptom of the cultural shift that IS occurring. And his hesitance to accept this shift IS entirely natural. He represents a demographic that sees itself under "attack" because they see the culture shifting, and nossir, they don't like it. Because it means that power is being lost, that their ability to control the monoculture is fading, and in order to gain power, or at least hold onto it, they are circling the troops to call it a moral crusade, rather than accept that population shifts, generational changes, and in fact political realities are fluid ground. Instead, they want to recast the discussion to being "fundamental differences" and thus try to regain ground.

Mind you, in doing so, they are ignoring a great deal of the basis of the very documents and the society that they are trying to "defend." In some case, it's willful ignorance, in others, it is outright recasting of the foundational documents by dint of their subjective reading of said documents, and given the philosophical leanings of the NeoCons as a movement, that isn't entirely surprising. Investiture into the concept of "subjective reality" and a somewhat interesting way of their use of the concept, both in media and scholastic work, is increasingly becoming their modus. It is, in my opinion, a very deliberate misrepresentation of subjective reality as a concept, but it is one that they base a great deal of time and effort upon, in order to create a reality. It is odd philosophic territory, but then again, NeoCons began as Ivory Tower types, who were walled up in academia, and it was Reagan who brought them out of those towers to shape policy, which they had only theoretical experience with. We have been soaking in the execution of those policies, and they don't exactly work in the same way that their games theory predicted, in part because theory doesn't necessarily always pan out. The difficulty has been that they control presses to try to reinforce their position by generating defenses to positions that are clearly not working as advertised, and instead of reworking the policies, they seek only to discredit those who attack the policies and their very real outcomes, and to reinforce the policies with papers of often specious foundations. In order to shore up policies that they are invested in, and a very real unwillingness to admit that the policies were flawed.
 
2013-03-30 09:45:58 AM

dickfreckle: Kittypie070: Ohhhh....can I steal that phrase?

Kittypie, everything I own belongs to you!

/except my dog


Squeeeeeeeeeeeeee
 
2013-03-30 09:50:22 AM

rewind2846: Internet Meme Rogers:
Dr. Ben Carson has a lot to teach us about how to defend yourself from fresh fruit. What if a gay guy comes at you with a crate of raspberries?

Then you unleash the Bengal Tiger.


I always love waking up to a Monty Python reference in the morning.  It's like waking up to....... victory!
 
2013-03-30 09:59:23 AM

RyogaM: I really don't get who much gayness causes certain people to loses their minds.  I mean, really.  Whether it's the Republicans, the Nazis, or brain-dead Muslim and Christian Fundamentalists, it's amazing how gayness just causes them to lose all perspective and make them want to turn to governmental "solutions" to a "problem" only they can identify.  Whether Republican, Nazi or Fundy, you are not allowed to use the government to enshrine your prejudice into law.



"you are not allowed to use the government to enshrine your prejudice into law."

Just remember that my liberal friend...
 
2013-03-30 10:09:16 AM

Kittypie070: dickfreckle: Kittypie070: Ohhhh....can I steal that phrase?

Kittypie, everything I own belongs to you!

/except my dog

Squeeeeeeeeeeeeee


My dog loves cats, and tries to face-hump other male dogs. Perhaps we can work something out. Right now he's on the balcony whimpering desperately at one of the feral cats we feed. Am pretty sure he's bisexual but also doesn't understand that he's supposed to stick to his species. Damn, dude. At least keep it in the family.

/retarded mutt with a heart of gold
 
2013-03-30 10:09:43 AM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

You know, what?  I think maybe the Dr. should avoid any abstract comparative rhetoric altogether.  Stick to brain surgery, dude, metaphor and analogy are far too complex for you to handle.
 
2013-03-30 10:13:24 AM

Mrtraveler01: How can a brain surgeon be this stupid?


He's a homeschooled brain surgeon.  They practice on themselves.
 
2013-03-30 10:18:19 AM
Meh.  He likes big fat libtards like you. When they fall they make more noise and sometimes they never get up!
 
2013-03-30 10:19:13 AM

Silly Jesus: [media-cache-lt0.pinterest.com image 192x307]
[sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 487x371]


just jump over the new hurdles Edwin
or is the President an obstacle?
 
2013-03-30 10:20:26 AM

nocturnal001: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems

It's not that flat taxes can't work, but rather that the plans we usually see claim to be our solution yet never bother to actually do the math. It seems like these guys just pick a percent that sounds good and run with it.

In the absence of spending cuts, lowering one person's taxes means you have to raise somebody else's.


Good.  We can raise a hell of a lot of people's taxes from 0%.
 
2013-03-30 10:23:59 AM

YodaTuna: I knew this guy was going to crash and burn after watching the prayer breakfast speech.  All the right winger got wet panties about the speech, but clearly didn't watch it.  They just thought it was neat he was "sticking it" to Obama (which he wasn't).  His entire speech was extreme right wing talking points.  Nothing new, nothing helpful.  The speech wasn't even particularly well delivered.

For the last time, it's not the messaging, it's the message.  Hating gays, punishing poor people/minorities and corporatism are not where the majority of american's sit ideologically at the moment.


Yep. This. My mom told me about him and I basically said he's nothing but a typical Tea Tard nut who says the same shiat. I also keep referring to him as a proctologist, because it's funnier that way. The only thing I took away from his stupid speech was that the President was in attendance and this jackwagon decided to be the biggest bore in the room and force the President to sit and listen to his bullshiat.

Christ, what an asshole.
 
2013-03-30 10:25:51 AM

Silly Jesus: nocturnal001: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems

It's not that flat taxes can't work, but rather that the plans we usually see claim to be our solution yet never bother to actually do the math. It seems like these guys just pick a percent that sounds good and run with it.

In the absence of spending cuts, lowering one person's taxes means you have to raise somebody else's.

Good.  We can raise a hell of a lot of people's taxes from 0%.


Damn those deductions!

You know the flat tax would have to be close to 30% in order for it to be revenue neutral right?
 
2013-03-30 10:27:04 AM

thamike: You know, what?  I think maybe the Dr. should avoid any abstract comparative rhetoric altogether.  Stick to brain surgery, dude, metaphor and analogy are far too complex for you to handle.


This goes to a comment I made further upthread, and the responses therein - you can teach raw data and professional thinking, but you can't teach basic sense. Hence, we have otherwise brilliant minds spewing the worst sort of bullsh*t once out of their trained comfort zone.

I'm nowhere near as academically and professionally accomplished as this man, yet when he approaches politics and social policy I still seem like the comparative genius. And that's just turrible.

/turrible
 
2013-03-30 10:28:28 AM

Silly Jesus: Good. We can raise a hell of a lot of people's taxes from 0%.


I don't know why you are still on about this.  Go, fly to the side of your representatives, Republicans or Democrat, and demand that they raise taxes on all those people not paying taxes!  Make it the first plank of your preferred party: We desire a flat tax of 30% for all people, no matter what!  Demand that they raise taxes on the free loaders and moochers!  Write letters, op eds and spread the word that whatever your party is, it wishes to raise taxes on all those moochers, like my disabled and retired Tea party Republican father and his wife!  God, how I wish they would have paid a dime during the years they demanded we invade Iraq.

Please, proceed.
 
2013-03-30 10:34:06 AM

ultraholland: Hollie Maea: This is what happens when you listen to talk radio, believe that it is true, and then open your mouth.

the world is a better place when idiots are vocal


oh, I completely agree. The true disaster would be if he had kept his thoughts to himself and become elected president (he does have a compelling biography). But this is still a cautionary tale...
 
2013-03-30 10:48:23 AM

VictoryCabal: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

Why is it that no one in politics can just say something like "I really farked up, I was wrong, I'm really sorry"?


That would require having a modicum of shame. People in politics don't have that.
 
2013-03-30 10:49:21 AM

syrynxx: The world would be a much better place without a trace of religion. It makes intelligent people think stupid things.


Sorry, dude, religon's not a magical, mystical force whispering in these people's ears and FORCING them to think stupid things.

I can goddamn guarantee you that if religion (or what most people 'consider' religion: That is, worshiping dieties, etc), were to vanish overnight, or never have existed, we would still have almost AAAALLLL of the same problems. I mean, think about it: Half of these problems are people going to war and killing people over a text that, literally, says YOU SHOULDN'T DO THAT. Heck, try comparing the Prosperity Gospel to what the bible actually says about wealth sometime!

So no, it's not religion that's the issue. It's people blindly following others, or eager to appeal to their supposed authorities. It's what was revealed to be a part of human nature via the Milgram experiment. Desire to appease authorities causes intelligent people to do stupid shiat. Lack of introspection causes people to do stupid shiat. *BEING HUMAN*, basically. We're not rational beings.

If religion were to vanish, or be outlawed and suppressed, it would very, VERY quickly be replaced, by, say, blind, fervent nationalism. In fact, we've SEEN that happen in the past.

Really, just seeming to think that it's only *religion* that causes problems like this is.. well, pretty dangerous, since it sort of implies you'd think you were immune.
 
2013-03-30 10:57:01 AM

Silly Jesus: nocturnal001: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: Mrtraveler01: Silly Jesus: I liked his 10% flat tax idea.

Ah, so he can't do math either huh?

Unless this is an additional tax, which in that case is heresy in the GOP.

Flat taxes aren't math?  Potato?

That's the kind of thinking one has to have to think that a 10% flat tax is sustainable.

These 41 countries with a flat tax might be interested in your expertise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_s ys tems

It's not that flat taxes can't work, but rather that the plans we usually see claim to be our solution yet never bother to actually do the math. It seems like these guys just pick a percent that sounds good and run with it.

In the absence of spending cuts, lowering one person's taxes means you have to raise somebody else's.

Good.  We can raise a hell of a lot of people's taxes from 0%.


Not that many pay zero. Most of those are elderly on SS and the disabled.
 
2013-03-30 10:59:56 AM

Felgraf: syrynxx: The world would be a much better place without a trace of religion. It makes intelligent people think stupid things.

Sorry, dude, religon's not a magical, mystical force whispering in these people's ears and FORCING them to think stupid things.

I can goddamn guarantee you that if religion (or what most people 'consider' religion: That is, worshiping dieties, etc), were to vanish overnight, or never have existed, we would still have almost AAAALLLL of the same problems. I mean, think about it: Half of these problems are people going to war and killing people over a text that, literally, says YOU SHOULDN'T DO THAT. Heck, try comparing the Prosperity Gospel to what the bible actually says about wealth sometime!

So no, it's not religion that's the issue. It's people blindly following others, or eager to appeal to their supposed authorities. It's what was revealed to be a part of human nature via the Milgram experiment. Desire to appease authorities causes intelligent people to do stupid shiat. Lack of introspection causes people to do stupid shiat. *BEING HUMAN*, basically. We're not rational beings.

If religion were to vanish, or be outlawed and suppressed, it would very, VERY quickly be replaced, by, say, blind, fervent nationalism. In fact, we've SEEN that happen in the past.

Really, just seeming to think that it's only *religion* that causes problems like this is.. well, pretty dangerous, since it sort of implies you'd think you were immune.


It's not what faith you follow, it's what you do with it. There are plenty of Buddhists who look upon rebirth and karma as an excuse to not do anything for the poor. It was their karma to come back to this world to suffer more, because they were bad, and they should feel bad. There are Christians who feel the same way, that God punishes those who have been wicked, and they wouldn't be poor and suffering if it wasn't in His plan. If flies against a great many of the teachings of either religion, but folks use what they find to reinforce their natural prejudices, or at least to justify crap that they are ALREADY doing. Be they pagans, Baptists, Catholics, or Buddhists. The faith itself isn't an indicator of one's charity or compassion, or their willingness to bash folks and be hurtful. Faith isn't the problem. It's what folks do with it. Same with ideology. There are socialists and communists who are simply repugnant folks. There are those who believe so much in democracy that they will subvert it and the foundation of our own Constitution to "defend" it.

Boils down to it: when you find folks twisting things up, especially if you happen to believe differently, is to call folks out on it. Get it out there. In relation to my earlier post on deviance, that is how societies work. We find those that deviate, and we either reward or punish for that deviance, or at least make our displeasure known. In some cases, that helps bring folks "back to the fold" of acceptable behavior. Or it pushes folks to excel to gain more praise for their efforts. The current dialog on marriage equality is our society trying to figure itself out, and what track we should be taking. It's not a bad thing. This is how societies work, and decrying the discussion is less helpful, as opposed to having meaningful dialog, and getting it all out there.
 
2013-03-30 11:01:04 AM
When you don't pay a doctor for his opinion, you get a really shiatty opinion.

We need to ask at least two other doctors what they think.
 
2013-03-30 11:02:24 AM

ThatGuyFromTheInternet:


Rule 34 never fails.
 
2013-03-30 11:03:39 AM

Felgraf: I mean, think about it: Half of these problems are people going to war and killing people over a text that, literally, says YOU SHOULDN'T DO THAT.


Well, apart from all the instances where these religious texts say you should (and, indeed, must) kill people. I've been hearing this argument a lot lately; that religions just an unfortunate scapegoat and that everything bad (or almost everything bad) would keep happening even if it didn't exist. The truth, though, is that there are plenty of terrible things - such as the lynching of gay people in Africa - that exist for literally no reason other than the religious beliefs that command or condone them.
 
2013-03-30 11:04:46 AM

dickfreckle: Kittypie070: dickfreckle: Kittypie070: Ohhhh....can I steal that phrase?

Kittypie, everything I own belongs to you!

/except my dog

Squeeeeeeeeeeeeee

My dog loves cats, and tries to face-hump other male dogs. Perhaps we can work something out. Right now he's on the balcony whimpering desperately at one of the feral cats we feed. Am pretty sure he's bisexual but also doesn't understand that he's supposed to stick to his species. Damn, dude. At least keep it in the family.

/retarded mutt with a heart of gold


LMAO

That dawg's a xenomorph, I tells ya! The face-humping gave it away!!


My cat is set in her ways, being 11 years old now and isn't really what I'd call friendly toward other cats. When she was a youngster she used to get into loud, energetic fights with the neighbor's cats and then come swaggering back inside to be looked over.

Dogs, she knows how to handle dogs pretty well, as she grew up with a rather crazed Boston Terrier and a Labrador. She didn't use her claws except to go hunting birds with.

/end threadjack
 
2013-03-30 11:10:55 AM
Conservatives don't seem to understand that you need a balance of credentials and character to win presidential elections in this day and age.
 
2013-03-30 11:11:21 AM
MSNBC fails to mention that before Dr. Carson made that comment, Hannity was discussing Justice Sotomayor's concern that finding a constitutional right to a gay marriage could establish a principle that could also apply to incestuous marriages and polygamy.  Carson was simply restating Sotomayor's concern, using different examples.  That's the context of it.
 
2013-03-30 11:13:02 AM

SkinnyHead: MSNBC fails to mention that before Dr. Carson made that comment, Hannity was discussing Justice Sotomayor's concern that finding a constitutional right to a gay marriage could establish a principle that could also apply to incestuous marriages and polygamy.  Carson was simply restating Sotomayor's concern, using different examples.  That's the context of it.


I thank everybody one in this thread in advance for not responding to this troll.
 
2013-03-30 11:16:11 AM
My first exposure to Carson was his long interview with NPR a few months ago.  I was unsurprised he was a conservative darling: he refused to answer reasonable questions, kicked the ball to scripture at his convenience, and was passive aggressive with the host.  When all of that failed, he basically went into the pseudo-intellectual gobbledy-gook that conservatives today are known for ("he's the stupid person's idea of a smart person").

In other words, I am completely unsurprised he turned out to be a misguided bigot.
 
2013-03-30 11:18:36 AM

Biological Ali: I thank everybody one in this thread in advance....


Don't quote the troll in any way when posting about the troll.  You gave the troll what it wants by repeating his words.
 
2013-03-30 11:19:16 AM

SkinnyHead: MSNBC fails to mention that before Dr. Carson made that comment, Hannity was discussing Justice Sotomayor's concern that finding a constitutional right to a gay marriage could establish a principle that could also apply to incestuous marriages and polygamy.  Carson was simply restating Sotomayor's concern, using different examples.  That's the context of it.


You said "MSNBC" as if a television station had something intelligent to contribute to any political conversation whatsoever.
 
2013-03-30 11:20:51 AM

Sgt Otter: Relatively Obscure: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

[www.reactiongifs.com image 193x135]

[img.photobucket.com image 480x360]


That's the math Republicans do to make themselves feel better when they're on the wrong side of an issue.
 
2013-03-30 11:22:24 AM

Sgt Otter: Relatively Obscure: "What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

[www.reactiongifs.com image 193x135]

[img.photobucket.com image 480x360]


I TIHNK "peach" means "pedophiles", but I'm not really sure here.  After all, I don't have the medical training this guy has.
 
2013-03-30 11:23:14 AM

whizbangthedirtfarmer: he's the stupid person's idea of a smart person


its sad because its true
 
2013-03-30 11:24:03 AM

RyogaM: Don't quote the troll in any way when posting about the troll. You gave the troll what it wants by repeating his words.


He's not the only troll in this thread, so I had to be specific. People merely quoting the posts doesn't bug me (and for that matter, it's not what he wants either) - it's when he can see that he's getting a rise out of people and getting them to waste their time trying to "debate" him that he knows his job is done.
 
2013-03-30 11:25:38 AM

Biological Ali: SkinnyHead: MSNBC fails to mention that before Dr. Carson made that comment, Hannity was discussing Justice Sotomayor's concern that finding a constitutional right to a gay marriage could establish a principle that could also apply to incestuous marriages and polygamy.  Carson was simply restating Sotomayor's concern, using different examples.  That's the context of it.

I thank everybody one in this thread in advance for not responding to this troll.


I can see how you wouldn't want this discussion derailed by the truth.
 
2013-03-30 11:28:16 AM

SkinnyHead: Biological Ali: SkinnyHead: MSNBC fails to mention that before Dr. Carson made that comment, Hannity was discussing Justice Sotomayor's concern that finding a constitutional right to a gay marriage could establish a principle that could also apply to incestuous marriages and polygamy.  Carson was simply restating Sotomayor's concern, using different examples.  That's the context of it.

I thank everybody one in this thread in advance for not responding to this troll.

I can see how you wouldn't want this discussion derailed by the truth.


You mean something that was thoroughly debunked on Wednesday?

You need new material dude.
 
2013-03-30 11:33:39 AM

Britney Spear's Speculum: Conservatives don't seem to understand that you need a balance of credentials and character to win presidential elections in this day and age.


Which Obama had in spades, so to speak, His academic prowess combined with his charm is what elected him, not the welfare queens the right wants us to believe ushered him into office. I'm as white as they come (seriously, I'm almost embarrassingly WASP) and I found the man convincing starting with the '04 DNC speech. And I typically decry speeches as huckster BS.

Years into his presidency, I take issue with many of his decisions. But I still like the man, Next week he'll do something that pisses me off, and I'll gripe about it in this tab - but I still admire the man for being self-made and smarter than the average bear.

Obama is far from perfect. But he's what we have in the face of the TeaPublicans of the world. His charm and turn of phrases endear him to the public where the GOP seems hell-bent on alienating huge segments of it. Sure, he's just another politician, but compared to his GOP rivals he's a farking saint.
 
2013-03-30 11:36:14 AM

dickfreckle: Britney Spear's Speculum: Conservatives don't seem to understand that you need a balance of credentials and character to win presidential elections in this day and age.

Which Obama had in spades, so to speak, His academic prowess combined with his charm is what elected him, not the welfare queens the right wants us to believe ushered him into office. I'm as white as they come (seriously, I'm almost embarrassingly WASP) and I found the man convincing starting with the '04 DNC speech. And I typically decry speeches as huckster BS.

Years into his presidency, I take issue with many of his decisions. But I still like the man, Next week he'll do something that pisses me off, and I'll gripe about it in this tab - but I still admire the man for being self-made and smarter than the average bear.

Obama is far from perfect. But he's what we have in the face of the TeaPublicans of the world. His charm and turn of phrases endear him to the public where the GOP seems hell-bent on alienating huge segments of it. Sure, he's just another politician, but compared to his GOP rivals he's a farking saint.


The thing that I will be anxious to see is who will fill his shoes when 2016 comes along.
 
2013-03-30 11:38:24 AM

Mrtraveler01: SkinnyHead: Biological Ali: SkinnyHead: MSNBC fails to mention that before Dr. Carson made that comment, Hannity was discussing Justice Sotomayor's concern that finding a constitutional right to a gay marriage could establish a principle that could also apply to incestuous marriages and polygamy.  Carson was simply restating Sotomayor's concern, using different examples.  That's the context of it.

I thank everybody one in this thread in advance for not responding to this troll.

I can see how you wouldn't want this discussion derailed by the truth.

You mean something that was thoroughly debunked on Wednesday?

You need new material dude.


I watched the entire show so I know it's true.  Hannity played the audio of Sotomayor's question about incest and polygamy.  Go ahead and say "troll" and "debunked" all you want, I'm just giving you the truth.
 
2013-03-30 11:40:05 AM

error 303: One Cuil = One level of abstraction away from the reality of a situation.
Example: You ask me for a Hamburger.
1 Cuil: if you asked me for a hamburger, and I gave you a raccoon.
2 Cuils: If you asked me for a hamburger, but it turns out I don't really exist. Where I was originally standing, a picture of a hamburger rests on the ground.
3 Cuils: You awake as a hamburger. You start screaming only to have special sauce fly from your lips. The world is in sepia.
4 Cuils: Why are we speaking German? A mime cries softly as he cradles a young cow. Your grandfather stares at you as the cow falls apart into patties. You look down only to see me with pickles for eyes, I am singing the song that gives birth to the universe.
5 Cuils: You ask for a hamburger, I give you a hamburger. You raise it to your lips and take a bite. Your eye twitches involuntarily. Across the street a father of three falls down the stairs. You swallow and look down at the hamburger in your hands. I give you a hamburger. You swallow and look down at the hamburger in your hands. You cannot swallow. There are children at the top of the stairs. A pickle shifts uneasily under the bun. I give you a hamburger. You look at my face, and I am pleading with you. The children are crying now. You raise the hamburger to your lips, tears stream down your face as you take a bite. I give you a hamburger. You are on your knees. You plead with me to go across the street. I hear only children's laughter. I give you a hamburger. You are screaming as you fall down the stairs. I am your child. You cannot see anything. You take a bite of the hamburger. The concrete rushes up to meet you. You awake with a start in your own bed. Your eye twitches involuntarily. I give you a hamburger. As you kill me, I do not make a sound. I give you a hamburger.
6 Cuils: You ask me for a hamburger. My attempt to reciprocate is cut brutally short as my body experiences a sudden lack of electrons. Across a variety of hidden dimensions you are dis ...


1-media-cdn.foolz.us
 
2013-03-30 11:41:05 AM

SkinnyHead: I watched the entire show so I know it's true.  Hannity played the audio of Sotomayor's question about incest and polygamy.  Go ahead and say "troll" and "debunked" all you want, I'm just giving you the truth.


You're not giving factual evidence, which is what people generally mean when they use the word "truth."
 
2013-03-30 11:41:11 AM
Dr. Carson, good Christian that he is, would fully support NAMBLA's position on marriage as there is nothing in the Bible preventing old men from marrying children and sexing them up.  If NAMBLA's position is they want to be able to marry and sex up children, then NAMBLA is fully in support of traditional Biblical marriage.
 
2013-03-30 11:43:24 AM

SkinnyHead: Mrtraveler01: SkinnyHead: Biological Ali: SkinnyHead: MSNBC fails to mention that before Dr. Carson made that comment, Hannity was discussing Justice Sotomayor's concern that finding a constitutional right to a gay marriage could establish a principle that could also apply to incestuous marriages and polygamy.  Carson was simply restating Sotomayor's concern, using different examples.  That's the context of it.

I thank everybody one in this thread in advance for not responding to this troll.

I can see how you wouldn't want this discussion derailed by the truth.

You mean something that was thoroughly debunked on Wednesday?

You need new material dude.

I watched the entire show so I know it's true.  Hannity played the audio of Sotomayor's question about incest and polygamy.  Go ahead and say "troll" and "debunked" all you want, I'm just giving you the truth.


I'll let this post from an earlier thread sum up my point:

http://www.fark.com/comments/7669148/Top-conservative-says-that-marr ia ge-equality-will-lead-to-shakes-magic-8-ball-immigrant-polygamists&new =1#c83279299
 
2013-03-30 11:44:19 AM

SkinnyHead: I watched the entire show so I know it's true.


BTW: You HAVE to be trolling if your only source for "the truth" is Sean Hannity.
 
2013-03-30 11:44:49 AM
Polygamists and incestors are also fully in compliance with Biblical law, as Genesis clearly shows that Eve sexed up all of her male children and Adam sexed up all of his children.  Same with Lot and his daughters. And, clearly, Biblical law support polygamist, as the Bible is full of Godly sanctioned Polygamists.  And, since the Republicans are all about Biblical law, they will have no problem with any of the above.
 
2013-03-30 11:45:50 AM
Ah so, the good doctor is hung up on semantics.  He is 100% right, the articulate GOPman didn't "compare" homosexuals wanting to get married to the sweet, tender ministrations of NAMBLA members or chicken farkers.  He "equated" them.
 
2013-03-30 11:46:04 AM

Mrtraveler01: The thing that I will be anxious to see is who will fill his shoes when 2016 comes along.


I've given this a lot of thought, and I'd love to see Hilldawg step into the shoes. This is a woman who knows how to get sh*t done, and after her stint as Secretary, I think people might realize she has a pair of balls lurking down there that probably put ours to shame.

We'll see. Lots of conjecture this far removed from primaries. But I'd like to see it. She keeps saying no, but the realities of America are saying yes.
 
2013-03-30 11:49:24 AM
Non-idiot:  What can prevent people who are old enough to consent but are close relatives and/or in a poly relationship from marrying?

Idiot: What can prevent people who are not old enough to consent to marriage to marry, or, prevent animals with no ability to consent to a contract enter into a marriage contract?

Guess which one Carson is.
 
2013-03-30 11:55:18 AM

dickfreckle: Mrtraveler01: The thing that I will be anxious to see is who will fill his shoes when 2016 comes along.

I've given this a lot of thought, and I'd love to see Hilldawg step into the shoes. This is a woman who knows how to get sh*t done, and after her stint as Secretary, I think people might realize she has a pair of balls lurking down there that probably put ours to shame.

We'll see. Lots of conjecture this far removed from primaries. But I'd like to see it. She keeps saying no, but the realities of America are saying yes.


That's what I would like to see as well. But I'm wondering as to what Plan B would be. I thought Cuomo might've had a shot but his stance on gun control pretty much torpedoed any chance he would have at connecting with Midwestern, Rocky Mountain, and Mid-Atlantic states.
 
2013-03-30 11:59:10 AM

ko_kyi: CorporatePerson: Pretty much every Republican I know has assured me at one time or another that Obama only got elected president because he's black.

That happens when they were told for a year the only reason they didn't vote for him was that they were racist.


How silly of me to forget that the Republican Party's stupidity is always the fault of teh libz.
 
2013-03-30 12:03:27 PM
I Hindenburged Myself With Birf Certificit!: I watched the whole program so i know it's true!

I ate the whole bag so I know it's healthy!

I _____ the whole _______ so I know it's [true, beneficial, genuine, etc.]!

i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-30 12:11:20 PM
There's nothing quite like a thread of people proclaiming that their own ignorance of set theory makes them "smarter" than a neurosurgeon.
 
2013-03-30 12:14:13 PM

Rent Party: dickfreckle: Speaker2Animals: (snip)

I've never understood how otherwise smart people can fall for politics that thrive on the lowest common denominator. I have a worthless BA from an equally worthless state drinking university that I don't recall attending, but even I know bullsh*t when I see it. Others can be educated in strict logic for 8 post-secondary years plus a residency and still can't count past potato. And I don't mean to say this because I disagree; I'm talking about actual stupidity, like the aforementioned Akin.

Meh, such is life.

Because they are not smart people.  Your father was not a smart person, the highly pedegreed jet engine designer down the hall is not a smart person, and this neurosurgeon is not a smart person.  They are morons.  Well trained morons, but morons nonetheless.


Salt of the earth, though...
 
2013-03-30 12:16:33 PM

Mrtraveler01: I'll let this post from an earlier thread sum up my point:


Your friend from the other thread says that incest is a bad comparison because there is a rational reason to prohibit inbreeding.  Gay marriage poses no risk of inbreeding.  So if we establish a legal principle that marriage equality is a fundamental constitutional right, why can't a father marry his son?  How about mother and daughter?  Why can't sister marry sister or brother marry brother?  And why should bi-sexual people be denied a plural marriage?  Wouldn't it be unconstitutional to deny a bi-sexual person a three-way marriage?
 
2013-03-30 12:22:43 PM

Infernalist: ghare: EmmaLou: cptjeff: EmmaLou: Just once, once I would like to go through a day and not think "WTF is wrong with people?"

Try going camping. A nice backpacking or canoe trip in a remote wilderness is a good way to get away from the derp. And everything else, really.

I've been seriously considering that.  I think being disconnected for a few days with definitely help.

Get a good tent. I mean really.

Rustics.

Seriously, if you need to get away, go get a hotel room for a week on the beach.  The woods are full of dirt, trees and animals.


To say nothing of hot water & room service.
 
2013-03-30 12:23:15 PM

Silly Jesus: RyogaM: Silly Jesus: Oh, I didn't get that that was your point. I'm not locked in to the 10%...I just liked the flat tax idea. I was just throwing a number out there.

Everyone was arguing that The Math Did Not Add Up.  That's an argument against a 10% flat tax, not the tax itself.

Being for a Flat Tax without mentioning a rate that is actually mathematically realistic is like being for Free hookers and Blow for everyone, without saying how you pay for it.  It's asinine.  Like Doc. Carson.

Usually libs argue against the flat tax on the basis of "the poors will have to pay as much (percentage wise) as the wealthy, and that's not faaaaaaiiiiiiiirrrrrr."  I was caught off guard.


My other problem with the flat tax is, most of the  proposals I've seen have the flat tax being implemented as a consumption tax, rather than an income or capital gains tax.  A consumption tax is about the most unfair implementation of a tax that I can think of.
 
2013-03-30 12:27:59 PM

SkinnyHead: Why can't sister marry sister or brother marry brother?  And why should bi-sexual people be denied a plural marriage?  Wouldn't it be unconstitutional to deny a bi-sexual person a three-way marriage?


Because marriage as it currently exists denies equal treatment to gay couples. It does not deny equal treatment to bigamists, it's impossible for 3 people to be 2 people.
 
2013-03-30 12:32:40 PM

cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: Why can't sister marry sister or brother marry brother?  And why should bi-sexual people be denied a plural marriage?  Wouldn't it be unconstitutional to deny a bi-sexual person a three-way marriage?

Because marriage as it currently exists denies equal treatment to gay couples. It does not deny equal treatment to bigamists, it's impossible for 3 people to be 2 people.


Don't even try to rationalize the stupidity of that invalid comparison. You're not taking Mark Twain's advice. Squash the red herrings and you'll find that they got nothin', other than their bible thumping of course.
 
2013-03-30 12:35:22 PM

agb1953: Dr. Carson did not compare the 3 groups.  He listed the three groups as being those who fall in love but are not man/woman combinations.  In 2006 a Sudanese man married a goat, so there is precedent for his remark.


And I disagree with what he said.

Just like I disagree with Christians, kiddie rapists, and Adolf Hitler.
 
2013-03-30 12:36:13 PM

DrPainMD: did anybody else notice that he didn't compare gay relationships to pedophilia?


Correct, he grouped them together as similar ideas, which is not comparison.
 
2013-03-30 12:37:26 PM

nocturnal001: agb1953: Dr. Carson did not compare the 3 groups.  He listed the three groups as being those who fall in love but are not man/woman combinations.  In 2006 a Sudanese man married a goat, so there is precedent for his remark.

Look, I just want to say that there are people bin this country that are bad for us. These groups are bad because they are fundamentally at odds with the American way of life. Child rapists, republicans, and serial killers all want to change our society for the worse.

Oh? Nah brah, I wasn't comparing those groups. I just put them down in the same sentence while trying to make a political point. Why you mad brah?

Nice try guy, but we know you really don't believe your claim.


** shakes fist **
 
2013-03-30 12:44:17 PM

cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: Why can't sister marry sister or brother marry brother?  And why should bi-sexual people be denied a plural marriage?  Wouldn't it be unconstitutional to deny a bi-sexual person a three-way marriage?

Because marriage as it currently exists denies equal treatment to gay couples. It does not deny equal treatment to bigamists, it's impossible for 3 people to be 2 people.


Who says marriage can only be between two people?  You are relying on the traditional definition of marriage. Gay marriage activists say that the traditional definition of marriage must be discarded.  If so, why shouldn't the part where marriage is limited to 2 people be discarded as well.  Why should a bi-sexual person be forced to marry only a man or woman?  Why not a three-way marriage?
 
2013-03-30 12:44:49 PM

SkinnyHead: Mrtraveler01: I'll let this post from an earlier thread sum up my point:

Your friend from the other thread says that incest is a bad comparison because there is a rational reason to prohibit inbreeding.  Gay marriage poses no risk of inbreeding.  So if we establish a legal principle that marriage equality is a fundamental constitutional right, why can't a father marry his son?  How about mother and daughter?  Why can't sister marry sister or brother marry brother?  And why should bi-sexual people be denied a plural marriage?  Wouldn't it be unconstitutional to deny a bi-sexual person a three-way marriage?


Hey, your smarter than Carson, who doesn't understand that all parties to a contract need the ability to consent.  Good jerb!

As for incest, all family units are overseen by the government ensure that children are protected from active abuse and neglect.  Abuse includes and is not limited to physical, emotional, sexual and physiological abuse.  The government has the obligation to prevent sexual abuse from occurring in a family, whether between parents, siblings or close relatives.  Sexual abuse, especially between parents and older/younger siblings, does not just start out of nowhere.  A parent who wishes to sexually abuse their children, or an older sibling that sexually abuses their younger siblings, do so after patient grooming of the child to mold the child to desire that sexual relationship.  The family unit, because it is isolated is perfect for this type of sexual grooming.  This type of grooming cannot be allowed to occur because it is abusive in and of itself.  The government prohibition on incest helps ensure that the family units they are supervising is free from this abuse.  Even if the parents and child and/or sibling couple meet after the age of majority, you can never be certain that the child has not been groomed to desire the relationship from their past family history.  In order to protect children from sexual abuse, one part of that protection is the outlawing of incest relationships.

As for poly marriage, at this time it would not work because the poly relationship is, by the nature of being poly, forces the government to treat the people in the relationship in an unequal manner than those in a to-party marriage.  Marriage forces the government to recognize that the other partner in the marriage has certain rights and obligations.  For example, a marriage partner has full say in regard to the medical treatment of their partner, if their partner is incapacitated.  In a poly marriage, the government cannot give any of the partners to the marriage full say, because there is more than one partner involved.  If the two partners disagree, then the government will not be able to choose between the two positions, because the government, as a matter of logic, cannot give both parties equal consideration.  Until ploys come up with some standard ploy marriage form that creates and explains how the government can split the rights and obligations of the marriage between all parties and still remain equal before the law (they can't, btw), they poly marriage will not be recognized.
 
2013-03-30 12:54:48 PM

Biological Ali: Well, apart from all the instances where these religious texts say you should (and, indeed, must) kill people. I've been hearing this argument a lot lately; that religions just an unfortunate scapegoat and that everything bad (or almost everything bad) would keep happening even if it didn't exist. The truth, though, is that there are plenty of terrible things - such as the lynching of gay people in Africa - that exist for literally no reason other than the religious beliefs that command or condone them.


Okay, so how were gay people treated under, say, the soviet union?
(Article 121)

Again. Religion is not a magic, mystical fairy force. It is a tool. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm not saying it's *just* scapegoat: There are vile versions of religions. But to claim it is somehow the fault of 'religion' itself, some sort of platonic ideal of religion is the true evil, seems.... misguided, at the very least. To pretend like people wouldn't do horrible, evil things to folks that are different if religion were to vanish seems *INCREDIBLY* naive.

Furthermore, if there were no reason for these people to do these things if religion didn't tell them to... ... why does the religion tell them to? It's not as though the beliefs themselves sprung fully formed from the very ground, or washed up ashore naked in a seashell. Someone went "dudes that sleep with other dudes need to be killed".

I mean, fark, the people that will manipulate a system to prove why it's OK to treat others as inferior have even infested SCIENTIFIC communities in the past (fark you, eugenics), and we've even got a self defense mechanism built in to try and get RID of assholes like that, and it still really took the horrors of the 3rd Reich to completely kill the eugenics movement in the scientific community.

"Ah!" but you might say, "But there were several scientists saying 'WTF? This isn't proper science! You're perverting the discipline in order to justify forced sterilization of folks you deem inferior!'", and you would be correct, since that is *entirely my point*.
 
2013-03-30 12:57:24 PM

SkinnyHead: Mrtraveler01: SkinnyHead: Biological Ali: SkinnyHead: MSNBC fails to mention that before Dr. Carson made that comment, Hannity was discussing Justice Sotomayor's concern that finding a constitutional right to a gay marriage could establish a principle that could also apply to incestuous marriages and polygamy.  Carson was simply restating Sotomayor's concern, using different examples.  That's the context of it.

I thank everybody one in this thread in advance for not responding to this troll.

I can see how you wouldn't want this discussion derailed by the truth.

You mean something that was thoroughly debunked on Wednesday?

You need new material dude.

I watched the entire show so I know it's true.  Hannity played the audio of Sotomayor's question about incest and polygamy.  Go ahead and say "troll" and "debunked" all you want, I'm just giving you the truth.


You gave us hearsay.  The judge disallows your testimony.  You are hereby stricken from the record.
 
2013-03-30 01:03:14 PM

Mrtraveler01: dickfreckle: Mrtraveler01: The thing that I will be anxious to see is who will fill his shoes when 2016 comes along.

I've given this a lot of thought, and I'd love to see Hilldawg step into the shoes. This is a woman who knows how to get sh*t done, and after her stint as Secretary, I think people might realize she has a pair of balls lurking down there that probably put ours to shame.

We'll see. Lots of conjecture this far removed from primaries. But I'd like to see it. She keeps saying no, but the realities of America are saying yes.

That's what I would like to see as well. But I'm wondering as to what Plan B would be. I thought Cuomo might've had a shot but his stance on gun control pretty much torpedoed any chance he would have at connecting with Midwestern, Rocky Mountain, and Mid-Atlantic states.


F*ck it man, I'm gonna run. I don't have any real money, but I'm not a felon and am formally educated. Some skeletons - mostly from strippers who are still alive grabbing cash from the local news. But this is New Orleans, man. I can get elected in the same area that forgave Vitter for being whipped while wearing a diaper.

 Give me a few years. I'm doing it. I have the plus of a deep voice and crew-cut appearance.
 
2013-03-30 01:18:23 PM

RyogaM: As for incest, all family units are overseen by the government ensure that children are protected from active abuse and neglect. Abuse includes and is not limited to physical, emotional, sexual and physiological abuse. The government has the obligation to prevent sexual abuse from occurring in a family, whether between parents, siblings or close relatives. Sexual abuse, especially between parents and older/younger siblings, does not just start out of nowhere. A parent who wishes to sexually abuse their children, or an older sibling that sexually abuses their younger siblings, do so after patient grooming of the child to mold the child to desire that sexual relationship. The family unit, because it is isolated is perfect for this type of sexual grooming. This type of grooming cannot be allowed to occur because it is abusive in and of itself. The government prohibition on incest helps ensure that the family units they are supervising is free from this abuse. Even if the parents and child and/or sibling couple meet after the age of majority, you can never be certain that the child has not been groomed to desire the relationship from their past family history. In order to protect children from sexual abuse, one part of that protection is the outlawing of incest relationships.


So you would deny a gay father the right to marry his adult gay son based on the assumption that gay fathers sexually abuse their sons by "grooming" them to have sexual desires toward their gay fathers?

RyogaM: As for poly marriage, at this time it would not work because the poly relationship is, by the nature of being poly, forces the government to treat the people in the relationship in an unequal manner than those in a to-party marriage. Marriage forces the government to recognize that the other partner in the marriage has certain rights and obligations. For example, a marriage partner has full say in regard to the medical treatment of their partner, if their partner is incapacitated. In a poly marriage, the government cannot give any of the partners to the marriage full say, because there is more than one partner involved. If the two partners disagree, then the government will not be able to choose between the two positions, because the government, as a matter of logic, cannot give both parties equal consideration. Until ploys come up with some standard ploy marriage form that creates and explains how the government can split the rights and obligations of the marriage between all parties and still remain equal before the law (they can't, btw), they poly marriage will not be recognized.


It is not unworkable to have two people with joint decision-making power.  A mother and father have joint decision making power over a child's medical care.  In fact, in a two-person marriage, with each partner having the power to make decisions affecting the marriage, there is much more of a potential for unresolvable disputes.  In a three-way marriage, majority rules.
 
2013-03-30 01:21:16 PM

SkinnyHead: Who says marriage can only be between two people? You are relying on the traditional definition of marriage. Gay marriage activists say that the traditional definition of marriage must be discarded. If so, why shouldn't the part where marriage is limited to 2 people be discarded as well. Why should a bi-sexual person be forced to marry only a man or woman? Why not a three-way marriage?


Completely hypothetical. Nobody is arguing for that. There's logic in the argument, and some day somebody might make that argument (no doubt why you chose to attempt to equate them). But it's invalid here. The argument is for two people of the same sex to be married. Try to stick to it, otherwise you're not even taking part in the debate at hand.
 
2013-03-30 01:26:52 PM

dickfreckle: Speaker2Animals: If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things."

And this is what passes for intelligence in the GOP.

Thing is, the dude is a pediatric neurosurgeon - not a job they just hand out to retards. My father was also a highly educated, menacingly intelligent man who for some reason let the derp break free when the conversation steered to politics or social norms. I'm sure plenty of you work with some highly pedigreed guy in the office down the hall who thinks Todd Akin makes sense and just got a raw deal from the liberal media. Then he goes back to designing a farking skyscraper or jet engine.

I've never understood how otherwise smart people can fall for politics that thrive on the lowest common denominator. I have a worthless BA from an equally worthless state drinking university that I don't recall attending, but even I know bullsh*t when I see it. Others can be educated in strict logic for 8 post-secondary years plus a residency and still can't count past potato. And I don't mean to say this because I disagree; I'm talking about actual stupidity, like the aforementioned Akin.

Meh, such is life.


Well said, my man. Well said.
 
2013-03-30 01:34:32 PM
Hm, just checking the inventory, I have one (1) turtle. and at least twelve (12) gay friends who of course have other gay friends.  Should I become a madame and maybe open my own "house"?  I'm sure that with the proper marketing tools my little home business just might take off.  Maybe I should hire a consultant, get some focus groups going or something.  After that, all I'd need to do is print business cards, put up flyers and open the doors to the all new amphibian Moulin Rouge.  I may even be able to book the singing frog from the old Merrie Melodies cartoons to do a cabaret act.

/I kid. anyone who touches my turtle inappropriately would be dealt with very harshly up to and including having their arse kicked and thrown out of my house
 
2013-03-30 01:34:55 PM
In a Christian Biblical context, what exactly is an "abomination"? Is it the same as a "sin"? Is it a thing thou Shall Not Do? Or is is just something yucky the Lord would rather not think about?

These distinctions make a difference. What is the original-language meaning of the word we now call "abomination"?
 
2013-03-30 01:47:02 PM
"What I was basically saying and if anyone was offended, I apologize to you. What I was basically saying is there is no group. I wasn't equating those things, I don't think they're equal. If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange. And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either. It doesn't mean that I'm equating the banana and the orange and the peach. In the same way I'm not equating those things." --Dr. Ben Carson

His speech writer:

i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-30 01:49:11 PM

Huck And Molly Ziegler: In a Christian Biblical context, what exactly is an "abomination"? Is it the same as a "sin"? Is it a thing thou Shall Not Do? Or is is just something yucky the Lord would rather not think about?

These distinctions make a difference. What is the original-language meaning of the word we now call "abomination"?


I think an abomination are supposedly sins that aren't original sin.  Sins that you don't come back from.  Oh dear god!

nation.foxnews.com


We live in an obamanation!

/oldie
 
2013-03-30 01:50:02 PM

mpirooz: SkinnyHead: Who says marriage can only be between two people? You are relying on the traditional definition of marriage. Gay marriage activists say that the traditional definition of marriage must be discarded. If so, why shouldn't the part where marriage is limited to 2 people be discarded as well. Why should a bi-sexual person be forced to marry only a man or woman? Why not a three-way marriage?

Completely hypothetical. Nobody is arguing for that. There's logic in the argument, and some day somebody might make that argument (no doubt why you chose to attempt to equate them). But it's invalid here. The argument is for two people of the same sex to be married. Try to stick to it, otherwise you're not even taking part in the debate at hand.


The question is not whether two people of the same sex should be allowed to marry.  It is whether there is a constitutional right to a gay marriage.  If the Supreme Court adopts the argument that there is a fundamental constitutional right to marriage equality, and that traditional concepts of marriage must be discarded to achieve marriage equality, and that become precedent, then other groups (bisexuals, polygamists, NAMBLA, people who want incestuous marriage or marriage with animals) can claim the same right.
 
2013-03-30 01:51:13 PM
Can you count how many ridiculous notions are in that picture?  i think the passenger jet about to hit the U.N. is an interesting touch.
 
2013-03-30 01:55:38 PM
Here's the interactive image of derp
 
2013-03-30 01:56:28 PM

thamike: Can you count how many ridiculous notions are in that picture?  i think the passenger jet about to hit the U.N. is an interesting touch.


I don't understand the rooster on the lectern, there.
 
2013-03-30 01:56:28 PM

thamike: Can you count how many ridiculous notions are in that picture?  i think the passenger jet about to hit the U.N. is an interesting touch.


Is that a Muslim Christmas tree?  Wat?
 
2013-03-30 01:57:27 PM

SkinnyHead: and that become precedent, then other groups (bisexuals, polygamists, NAMBLA, people who want incestuous marriage or marriage with animals) can claim the same right.


Only if the government recognizes group marriage. Which it does not. The unequal treatment is in regards to two consenting adults. Currently, the equal-rights issue is that two consenting adults cannot marry each other.
 
2013-03-30 02:01:08 PM

cameroncrazy1984: thamike: Can you count how many ridiculous notions are in that picture?  i think the passenger jet about to hit the U.N. is an interesting touch.

I don't understand the rooster on the lectern, there.


Matthew 26:34 I think.

"Truly I tell you," Jesus answered, "this very night, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times."
 
2013-03-30 02:01:59 PM

SkinnyHead: The question is not whether two people of the same sex opposite races should be allowed to marry. It is whether there is a constitutional right to a gay marriage between people of different races. If the Supreme Court adopts the argument that there is a fundamental constitutional right to marriage between people of different races equality, and that traditional concepts of marriage must be discarded to achieve marriage between people of different races equality, and that become precedent, then other groups (gays, bisexuals, polygamists, NAMBLA, people who want incestuous marriage or marriage with animals) can claim the same right even though polygamy requires the government to treat people within the poly marriage unequally before the law, child and animal marriage is impossible because of inability to consent, and

incest marriages are not even being proposed by anyone.

Man, it's awesome who ridiculous the anti-gay people make themselves look on a daily basis.
 
2013-03-30 02:03:02 PM

SkinnyHead: mpirooz: SkinnyHead: Who says marriage can only be between two people? You are relying on the traditional definition of marriage. Gay marriage activists say that the traditional definition of marriage must be discarded. If so, why shouldn't the part where marriage is limited to 2 people be discarded as well. Why should a bi-sexual person be forced to marry only a man or woman? Why not a three-way marriage?

Completely hypothetical. Nobody is arguing for that. There's logic in the argument, and some day somebody might make that argument (no doubt why you chose to attempt to equate them). But it's invalid here. The argument is for two people of the same sex to be married. Try to stick to it, otherwise you're not even taking part in the debate at hand.

The question is not whether two people of the same sex should be allowed to marry.  It is whether there is a constitutional right to a gay marriage.  If the Supreme Court adopts the argument that there is a fundamental constitutional right to marriage equality, and that traditional concepts of marriage must be discarded to achieve marriage equality, and that become precedent, then other groups (bisexuals, polygamists, NAMBLA, people who want incestuous marriage or marriage with animals) can claim the same right.


You're not paying attention at all. Anybody can claim that right, that's not the argument here. The argument here is for same sex marriages being protected under the law equally as opposite sex marriages.

When somebody challenges the courts on marrying multiple people you can have your argument. Your other arguments are pure hate-inspiring rhetoric that have no validity at all - plants, animals, inanimate objects cannot sign binding contracts (and defy common sense) and any NAMBLA reference should only be brought up when we're talking about the priests, who have earned their reputation.

Do you not feel the least bit remorseful for attempting to equate absolutely normal people, people you surely know, friends, relatives and those you don't, with those that societies deem taboo, perverse or even criminal?
 
2013-03-30 02:09:21 PM
For the record, I would love, as a lawyer to see poly-marriage made legal.  If you've spent a minute in a family court, you know how contentious, and money-making for the lawyers, it is when you have two attorneys zealously representing their client's position.  Now, imagine when you have a poly marriage of 10, each with their own attorney, each with a right to be heard from, and all their witnesses to be heard from, in court.  Oh god, the billable hours!
 
2013-03-30 02:10:21 PM

RyogaM: SkinnyHead: The question is not whether two people of the same sex opposite races should be allowed to marry. It is whether there is a constitutional right to a gay marriage between people of different races. If the Supreme Court adopts the argument that there is a fundamental constitutional right to marriage between people of different races equality, and that traditional concepts of marriage must be discarded to achieve marriage between people of different races equality, and that become precedent, then other groups (gays, bisexuals, polygamists, NAMBLA, people who want incestuous marriage or marriage with animals) can claim the same right even though polygamy requires the government to treat people within the poly marriage unequally before the law, child and animal marriage is impossible because of inability to consent, and incest marriages are not even being proposed by anyone.

Man, it's awesome who ridiculous the anti-gay people make themselves look on a daily basis.


You think that's funny, check this out:

i48.photobucket.com
img194.imageshack.us
 
2013-03-30 02:11:50 PM

The_Sponge: I like turtles.


Careful, don't want to make the goat jealous
 
2013-03-30 02:12:00 PM
 
2013-03-30 02:12:32 PM
I've had several interactions with Carson. My daughter has a myriad of medical issues, including neurological, and we live a few hours from Hopkins (though in Virginia). Back when we were looking for good neurosurgeons to bounce "second opinions" off of, Carson was a natural choice. Being that we were out of state and my daughter is on Medicaid, we paid out of pocket for his time. We were very unimpressed.

I had no idea about his politics at the time, but his reputation several years ago was that he was some sort of neurological genius. It quickly became apparent to us that such wasn't the case. We were kind of dumbfounded at just how simple-minded he seemed.

So it comes as no surprise that he's become something of a laughingstock after thrusting himself into the limelight.
 
2013-03-30 02:12:42 PM
Skinnyhead: I am pro-incest, dammit! Where is my turtle?

Cork it, ya toejam-breath'd foo.
 
2013-03-30 02:12:48 PM

thamike: RyogaM: SkinnyHead: The question is not whether two people of the same sex opposite races should be allowed to marry. It is whether there is a constitutional right to a gay marriage between people of different races. If the Supreme Court adopts the argument that there is a fundamental constitutional right to marriage between people of different races equality, and that traditional concepts of marriage must be discarded to achieve marriage between people of different races equality, and that become precedent, then other groups (gays, bisexuals, polygamists, NAMBLA, people who want incestuous marriage or marriage with animals) can claim the same right even though polygamy requires the government to treat people within the poly marriage unequally before the law, child and animal marriage is impossible because of inability to consent, and incest marriages are not even being proposed by anyone.

Man, it's awesome who ridiculous the anti-gay people make themselves look on a daily basis.

You think that's funny, check this out:

[i48.photobucket.com image 668x496]
[img194.imageshack.us image 594x372]


Got damn, that's funny/
 
2013-03-30 02:16:57 PM

Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.


It's like being the Al Queda # 2
 
2013-03-30 02:17:38 PM

cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: and that become precedent, then other groups (bisexuals, polygamists, NAMBLA, people who want incestuous marriage or marriage with animals) can claim the same right.

Only if the government recognizes group marriage. Which it does not. The unequal treatment is in regards to two consenting adults. Currently, the equal-rights issue is that two consenting adults cannot marry each other.


If the traditional definition of marriage is thrown out to achieve marriage equality for all, then governments will be forced to recognize group marriage. You cannot say that the traditional definition of marriage must give way to permit marriage equality for same sex marriages, and then cite the traditional definition of marriage as a reason to deny marriage equality for group marriages or other non-traditional forms of marriage.
 
2013-03-30 02:20:31 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gay marriage is not a civil rights issue; it is a question of whether or not there exists a compelling enough interest for the government to subsidize and encourage gay marriage. As same-sex couples cannot procreate and, in fact, have the potential to harm any children they might raise, it is certainly in the interest of the federal government to maintain the stance it presented in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).


1) Not restricting rights is not encouraging, by that logic the government encourages abortions, divorce, bankruptcy... you get the point.

2) The procreation argument is beyond debunked. Hetero couples can choose to not have children, or may not be able to biologically produce children. What of birth control then? Both pharmaceutical and surgical...

3) Because hetero couples are proven to never do harm to their children or raise them poorly? Because there is scientific evidence that gay people chronically abuse or do harm to children they raise?

These arguments are weak, invalid and offensive.
 
2013-03-30 02:22:43 PM

thamike: Huck And Molly Ziegler: In a Christian Biblical context, what exactly is an "abomination"? Is it the same as a "sin"? Is it a thing thou Shall Not Do? Or is is just something yucky the Lord would rather not think about?

These distinctions make a difference. What is the original-language meaning of the word we now call "abomination"?

I think an abomination are supposedly sins that aren't original sin.  Sins that you don't come back from.  Oh dear god!

[nation.foxnews.com image 850x333]


We live in an obamanation!

/oldie


That's demanding a "Pic Unrelated" caption.
 
2013-03-30 02:23:07 PM

SkinnyHead: If the traditional definition of marriage is thrown out to achieve marriage among people of different races, then governments will be forced to recognize marriage between tables and chairs.


Stop it, el Chip.
 
2013-03-30 02:24:57 PM

RyogaM: For the record, I would love, as a lawyer to see poly-marriage made legal.  If you've spent a minute in a family court, you know how contentious, and money-making for the lawyers, it is when you have two attorneys zealously representing their client's position.  Now, imagine when you have a poly marriage of 10, each with their own attorney, each with a right to be heard from, and all their witnesses to be heard from, in court.  Oh god, the billable hours!


And that is precisely why poly-marriages aren't ever going to be legal.  The state has a vested interest in marriages insofar as it has to settle things like inheritance, tax, and paternal issues, which is why it is involved in the wedding game at all.   Legal poly-marriage would make that pretty much impossible.
 
2013-03-30 02:26:26 PM

mpirooz: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gay marriage is not a civil rights issue; it is a question of whether or not there exists a compelling enough interest for the government to subsidize and encourage gay marriage. As same-sex couples cannot procreate and, in fact, have the potential to harm any children they might raise, it is certainly in the interest of the federal government to maintain the stance it presented in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

1) Not restricting rights is not encouraging, by that logic the government encourages abortions, divorce, bankruptcy... you get the point.

2) The procreation argument is beyond debunked. Hetero couples can choose to not have children, or may not be able to biologically produce children. What of birth control then? Both pharmaceutical and surgical...

3) Because hetero couples are proven to never do harm to their children or raise them poorly? Because there is scientific evidence that gay people chronically abuse or do harm to children they raise?

These arguments are weak, invalid and offensive.


Do you know what probability means?
 
2013-03-30 02:27:20 PM

Benjimin_Dover: Mrtraveler01: Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.

Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.

No, he isn't a rising star except in the minds of the libs who apparently dropped a collective load in their pants when he dared open his mouth and utter anything other than what they think he should have said at the prayer breakfast.  A person of color that thinks for him or herself is the scariest thing to a Dem and they must always be targetted for destruction usually with Uncle Tom type terminology.


Actually, there was some bipartisan condemnation of that speech:

Dr. Ben Carson should apologize to President ObamaBy Cal Thomas


Our politics have become so polarized and corrupted that a president of the United States cannot even attend an event devoted to drawing people closer to God and bridge partisan and cultural divides without being lectured about his policies.


Last Thursday at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C., Dr. Ben Carson, director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, and a 2008 recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, broke with a 61-year-old tradition and publicly disagreed with some of the president's policies, such as "ObamaCare," taxation and the national debt.


Carson should publicly apologize and stop going on TV doing "victory laps" and proclaiming that reaction to his speech was overwhelmingly positive. That's not the point. While many might agree with his positions (and many others don't as shown by the November election results), voicing them at the National Prayer Breakfast in front of the president was the wrong venue.


Organizers for this event tell speakers ahead of time to steer clear of politics, but Carson apparently "went rogue" on them. I'm told organizers were astonished and disapproving of the critical parts of Carson's keynote address. The breakfast is supposed to bring together people from different political viewpoints and cultures. It is supposed to bridge divides, not widen them.

Read more:  http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/02/12/dr-ben-carson-should-apolog i ze-to-president-obama/#ixzz2P3471sHW

/Cal Thomas is a panelist on Fox News Watch, a Fox Newsprogram criticizing the media, and until September 2005 hosted After Hours with Cal Thomas on the same network; he wasvice president of the Moral Majority from 1980 to 1985.
 
2013-03-30 02:27:39 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: mpirooz: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gay marriage is not a civil rights issue; it is a question of whether or not there exists a compelling enough interest for the government to subsidize and encourage gay marriage. As same-sex couples cannot procreate and, in fact, have the potential to harm any children they might raise, it is certainly in the interest of the federal government to maintain the stance it presented in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

1) Not restricting rights is not encouraging, by that logic the government encourages abortions, divorce, bankruptcy... you get the point.

2) The procreation argument is beyond debunked. Hetero couples can choose to not have children, or may not be able to biologically produce children. What of birth control then? Both pharmaceutical and surgical...

3) Because hetero couples are proven to never do harm to their children or raise them poorly? Because there is scientific evidence that gay people chronically abuse or do harm to children they raise?

These arguments are weak, invalid and offensive.

Do you know what probability means?


Probably.
 
2013-03-30 02:29:05 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: mpirooz: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gay marriage is not a civil rights issue; it is a question of whether or not there exists a compelling enough interest for the government to subsidize and encourage gay marriage. As same-sex couples cannot procreate and, in fact, have the potential to harm any children they might raise, it is certainly in the interest of the federal government to maintain the stance it presented in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

1) Not restricting rights is not encouraging, by that logic the government encourages abortions, divorce, bankruptcy... you get the point.

2) The procreation argument is beyond debunked. Hetero couples can choose to not have children, or may not be able to biologically produce children. What of birth control then? Both pharmaceutical and surgical...

3) Because hetero couples are proven to never do harm to their children or raise them poorly? Because there is scientific evidence that gay people chronically abuse or do harm to children they raise?

These arguments are weak, invalid and offensive.

Do you know what probability means?


Is it your contention that gay parents have a higher probability of harming their children than straight parents?  Do you have a citation for that there assertion?
 
2013-03-30 02:32:19 PM

mpirooz: Because there is scientific evidence that gay people chronically abuse or do harm to children they raise?


Nope.
 
2013-03-30 02:35:17 PM

SkinnyHead: If the traditional definition of marriage is thrown out


The "traditional definition" of marriage is the exchange of women for property. Again, where is the equal protection issue when the government recognizes marriage between 2 consenting adults? As I said, you cannot make 3 people fit into 2.
 
2013-03-30 02:40:36 PM
Here's the point: If the government recognizes marriage between any 2 consenting unrelated adults, that provides equal protection for everyone. Someone who wants to marry more than one person, or a related person is asking for a special right and thus does not fall under equal protection.
 
2013-03-30 02:41:56 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Do you know what probability means?


I detect a probability of Maximum Trolling.
 
2013-03-30 02:48:35 PM
"If you ask me for an apple and I give you an orange you would say, that's not an orange."

No, I would say, "That's not an apple."  Why would I say that it's not an orange?  Why would I even mention oranges after asking for an apple?

"And I say, that's a banana. And that's not an apple either. Or a peach, that's not an apple, either."

And I would say, "Why are you mentioning other fruits, when I asked you for an apple?"

/All I wanted was an apple!
//And he wouldn't give it to me!
 
2013-03-30 02:53:46 PM

Mrtraveler01: Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.

Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.


He's been a very well known neurosurgeon for like 25 years. But yes, he's also been a "rising star" since he talked at the National Prayer Breakfast a month and a half ago, and gave a politically charged speech right in front of Obama. Following that, he quickly started the conservative talk show circuit and became labelled as the "rising star" of the GOP,  culminating with his speech at CPAC. There he also  announced he was retiring from surgery in a couple months (fueling speculation he was entering politics), and performed pretty well in the CPAC straw poll.

I think the GOP just saw a black guy who didn't appear crazy like Herman Cain or Michael Steele, and thought "this is our chance to get the minority vote!" not realizing yet he was equally crazy. I really can't wait for the day the GOP finally realizes they can't appeal to a certain group of people simply by running a black person (or a hispanic/Rubio, or a woman/Palin). They need to actually change what they say, too.
 
2013-03-30 02:57:23 PM

dickfreckle: thamike: You know, what?  I think maybe the Dr. should avoid any abstract comparative rhetoric altogether.  Stick to brain surgery, dude, metaphor and analogy are far too complex for you to handle.

This goes to a comment I made further upthread, and the responses therein - you can teach raw data and professional thinking, but you can't teach basic sense. Hence, we have otherwise brilliant minds spewing the worst sort of bullsh*t once out of their trained comfort zone.

I'm nowhere near as academically and professionally accomplished as this man, yet when he approaches politics and social policy I still seem like the comparative genius. And that's just turrible.

/turrible


Physical skills and mental skills are two very different things that don't often correlate all that well. For some reason, though, too many people think those with M.D. after their names know everything there is to know about everything and accept every word as the immutable Word of Truth(tm).
 
2013-03-30 03:01:09 PM
Came to catch up on the latest.

Found SkinHead.

Leaving to scrape scum from skin several times.

Then I'm going to do the Stanford-Binet (r) to see how many IQ points I lost through exposure.
 
2013-03-30 03:02:37 PM

Diagonal: dickfreckle: thamike: You know, what?  I think maybe the Dr. should avoid any abstract comparative rhetoric altogether.  Stick to brain surgery, dude, metaphor and analogy are far too complex for you to handle.

This goes to a comment I made further upthread, and the responses therein - you can teach raw data and professional thinking, but you can't teach basic sense. Hence, we have otherwise brilliant minds spewing the worst sort of bullsh*t once out of their trained comfort zone.

I'm nowhere near as academically and professionally accomplished as this man, yet when he approaches politics and social policy I still seem like the comparative genius. And that's just turrible.

/turrible

Physical skills and mental skills are two very different things that don't often correlate all that well. For some reason, though, too many people think those with M.D. after their names know everything there is to know about everything and accept every word as the immutable Word of Truth(tm).


Sort of like how Newt Gingrich sometimes writes books about history so he's always considered to be "the smartest guy in the room"

Who was it that once said of him that he was "what dumb people think smart guys sound like"?
 
2013-03-30 03:21:05 PM
If only Fark existed in the 60's. It'd be fun to have screencaps of the Fark Independents laying out their principled Biblical opposition to interracial marriage.
 
2013-03-30 03:26:40 PM

CorporatePerson: If only Fark existed in the 60's. It'd be fun to have screencaps of the Fark Independents laying out their principled Biblical opposition to interracial marriage.


Would you settle for numerous "Free Republic" threads from 2000, where they defended Bob Jones University's interracial dating ban?

/Lurked there during those days.
//The stupid, it burned.
 
2013-03-30 03:31:12 PM

Felgraf: Okay, so how were gay people treated under, say, the soviet union?


Well, I can tell you that the number of people who were executed (or lynched with the tacit or explicit approval of the government) during the entire history of the USSR is maybe comparable to number of gay people lynched in Africa every year right now.

Felgraf: platonic ideal of religion


I'm not arguing about, nor do I particularly care about, the "platonic ideal of religion". All I'm doing is making the very obvious observation that if a situation were to arise wherein humanity collectively and instantly abandoned its belief in all religions, there are entire classes of violence (and various smaller evils) that would vanish outright because they are currently propped up by literally nothing other than various religious beliefs.

.
 
2013-03-30 03:37:06 PM

cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: If the traditional definition of marriage is thrown out

The "traditional definition" of marriage is the exchange of women for property. Again, where is the equal protection issue when the government recognizes marriage between 2 consenting adults? As I said, you cannot make 3 people fit into 2.


That's sophistry.  The traditional definition of marriage in America is the union of one man and one woman.

In Lawrence v. Texas, dissenters warned that if the court invents a constitutional right to sodomy, it will set a precedent that will lead to the claim that there is a constitutional right to a gay marriage.  Justice O'Connor scoffed at that:  "Texas cannot assert any legitimate state interest here, such as national security or preserving the traditional institution of marriage. Unlike the moral disapproval of same-sex relations -- the asserted state interest in this case -- other reasons exist to promote the institution of marriage beyond mere moral disapproval of an excluded group."

Gay marriage advocates are now making the argument that O'Connor said couldn't be made.  They are saying that a government's interest in preserving the traditional institution of marriage does not justify denying gay marriage.  If it does not justify denying a gay marriage, it does not justify denying a group marriage

cameroncrazy1984: Here's the point: If the government recognizes marriage between any 2 consenting unrelated adults, that provides equal protection for everyone. Someone who wants to marry more than one person, or a related person is asking for a special right and thus does not fall under equal protection.


One can just as easily say that if the government recognizes marriage between any 2 consenting unrelated adults of the opposite sex, that provides equal protection for everyone, and that someone who wants to marry a person of the same sex is asking for a special right and thus does not fall under equal protection. I'm told that reasoning is wrongheaded when it comes to equal protection for gay marriage.  If it is wrongheaded to use that reasoning to deny equal protection for gay marriage, why wouldn't it be considered wrongheaded to use that same reasoning to deny equal protection for group marriage.
 
2013-03-30 03:42:33 PM

Rent Party: Is it your contention that gay parents have a higher probability of harming their children than straight parents?  Do you have a citation for that there assertion?


Why don't you try reading the article I linked?

Not only that, but hetero couples are infinitely more likely to have children without medical intervention on the average.   As for the typical rebuttal that not all hetero couples are capable of having children, it makes as much sense as a farmer arguing not to plant crops because the germination rate isn't perfect.
 
2013-03-30 03:44:12 PM

SkinnyHead: The traditional definition of marriage in America is the union of one man and one woman.


Again, that is incorrect. That definition has only been around since 1964.
 
2013-03-30 03:48:04 PM

Fart_Machine: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Do you know what probability means?

I detect a probability of Maximum Trolling.


This guy comes into threads about LGBT rights to do two things:

1 - "Argue" about gay rights using, word-for-word, the same arguments that were made against interracial marriage(I suspect that he words his post so as to elicit that specific rebuttal).

2 - Post comically bad factual misunderstandings about gay people, some of which are basically decades-old urban legends.

It's obvious that he's not arguing in good faith. The only question is whether this is a ploy to make conservatives look bad (well, worse) or whether he's just being an asshole for the sake of it.
 
2013-03-30 03:50:38 PM
SkinnyHead:

BraveNewCheneyWorld:


It's sad how the issue is two consenting adults that are part of a minority are being denied the same rights and freedoms granted to everyone else in a country founded on equality for all, and you two trolls constantly try to tell us why it's perfectly fine to treat these people as second-class sub-humans by using bullshiat that's been proven as bullshiat in the past week alone, to say nothing of being proven bullshiat for many years now, and straight-up lying and misrepresenting.

Is it seriously that difficult for you to let gays marry each other? Do you honestly think that consenting adults being allowed to marry will lead straight to legal pedophilia and bestiality? Show us on the doll where the gay people touched you. Rational people would not continue the crusade of idiocy that the two of you are hell-bent to ride until your dying breath.
 
2013-03-30 03:56:52 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Rent Party: Is it your contention that gay parents have a higher probability of harming their children than straight parents?  Do you have a citation for that there assertion?

Why don't you try reading the article I linked?


Because you linked to an opinion piece, not a citation.   I am as uninterested in that guys opinion on the matter as I am in yours.   I am interested in scientific study and whatever facts may be relevant to forming an opinion on the matter, but you haven't provided any of that.   What has been provided would indicate that you are pretty much full of shiat.

Not only that, but hetero couples are infinitely more likely to have children without medical intervention on the average.   As for the typical rebuttal that not all hetero couples are capable of having children, it makes as much sense as a farmer arguing not to plant crops because the germination rate isn't perfect.

Under equal protection if you are asserting that gays shouldn't be married because they can't have kids, then you must (unless you are a complete retard) assert the same for hetro people that can't have kids as well.  If "having kids" is the state interest, then that has to be applied equally.

Right?
 
2013-03-30 04:09:31 PM

spongeboob: part of the problem: spongeboob: This guy is a Seventh day Adventist right, I would have loved to see him being asked does your church really think going to church on Sunday instead of Saturday is the mark of the Beast? But no one would ask him that if he ran as a Republican.

Fair enough but SDAs take seperation of church and state VERY seriously. If we have to have a republican we could do much much worse. Ive even known SDAs to support pro choice candidates soley because the religious right was for them.
a
(Not sda)

SDA is for separation of church and state because they are afraid of the coming National Sunday Law that will force them to go to church on Sundays. They also believe the Pope or the Papacy is the anti-Christ, it is something they wont tell you at first.
They also have some very very weird health beliefs. I don't think they have officially renounced that masturbation causes all kinds of health problems.  Meat leads to cancer. You shouldn't eat fruit and vegetables at the same time because they 'fight' in the stomach. Vinegar is bad for you.
I have heard it preached in SDA churches if your child is a practicing homosexual you should shun them.
They tithe 10%, yeah I know lots of churches do you say, but in the SDA faith that tithe goes only to pay their clergy, every thing else upkeep on their churches, outreach programs is paid for by additional money the faithful have to give.  When you die you should leave everything to the Church because your kids may do something immoral with it.

I could go on.

/baptized as a SDA as an adult even though I told the preacher I had some reservations about the whole Ellen White prophet thing.


I was just trying to be nice to your religion. Sheesh. (Related to some well known SDAs. Licensed lay minister in another church. Everybody came to the babys baptism and made nice.) But yeah all of the above.....
 
2013-03-30 04:13:47 PM

Biological Ali: This guy comes into threads about LGBT rights to do two things:


This is not the first time I will have pointed out that you have an unhealthy obsession with me.

Biological Ali: 1 - "Argue" about gay rights using, word-for-word, the same arguments that were made against interracial marriage(I suspect that he words his post so as to elicit that specific rebuttal).


Really? My argument about reproduction pretty much proves yet again, you're a liar.

Keizer_Ghidorah: Is it seriously that difficult for you to let gays marry each other? Do you honestly think that consenting adults being allowed to marry will lead straight to legal pedophilia and bestiality? Show us on the doll where the gay people touched you. Rational people would not continue the crusade of idiocy that the two of you are hell-bent to ride until your dying breath.


I think there's a good argument to be made for the idea that an effort to normalize one form of deviancy will tend to normalize others as well.

Rent Party: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Rent Party: Is it your contention that gay parents have a higher probability of harming their children than straight parents?  Do you have a citation for that there assertion?

Why don't you try reading the article I linked?

Because you linked to an opinion piece, not a citation.   I am as uninterested in that guys opinion on the matter as I am in yours.   I am interested in scientific study and whatever facts may be relevant to forming an opinion on the matter, but you haven't provided any of that.   What has been provided would indicate that you are pretty much full of shiat.


The article referred to a study.  Like I said, try reading the article.

Not only that, but hetero couples are infinitely more likely to have children without medical intervention on the average.   As for the typical rebuttal that not all hetero couples are capable of having children, it makes as much sense as a farmer arguing not to plant crops because the germination rate isn't perfect.

Under equal protection if you are asserting that gays shouldn't be married because they can't have kids, then you must (unless you are a complete retard) assert the same for hetro people that can't have kids as well.  If "having kids" is the state interest, then that has to be applied equally.

Right?


Did you not read the underlined sentence?  I already addressed that "point".
 
2013-03-30 04:19:44 PM

Sgt Otter: Mrtraveler01: Relatively Obscure: Carson's comparison of gay relationships to pedophilia (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man/Boy Love Association) and bestiality has caused the pediatric neurosurgeon to fall from his perch as a Republican rising a star in recent days.

As many people as have occupied that position recently, it's like they coated that perch with axle grease.

Wait, he was a rising star for the GOP? I haven't even heard of him until earlier this week.
Limbaugh: Ben Carson Has Democrats Scared To Death


It's hard to find anything funnier than that:

RUSH LIMBAUGH: Dr. Benjamin Carson has taken the world by storm. Dr. Benjamin Carson from Johns Hopkins University took CPAC by storm. He was on Hannity last night. Anytime he speaks, he just dominates. Everybody loves Dr. Carson, and the reason they love Dr. Carson is he is able to articulate and explain conservatism in a way that is persuasive without raising his voice at all. He sounds like your dad talking to you -- or not your dad, your best buddy talking to you at the table, or in a bar, or whatever the most-nonthreatening place you can be is.

I think Dr. Benjamin Carson has probably got everybody in the Democrat Party scared to death. It's gonna be really hard to demonize this guy -- really, really hard -- partially because of his race, but not just because he's African-American.

It's because you can call this guy all kinds of demonic names; he just doesn't fit the bill. You can say he's all these horrible things; then you hear him, see him, and listen to him, and it doesn't click. He saves children. He saves children with his hands. He saves their little brains. He saves lit-tle children! He's a ped-i-a-tric neu-ro-sur-geon. He saves the children, and he probably doesn't exude the signs of overt wealth. There's not a character in the TV series The Bible that looks like him.

/So, he's going with "It's hard to demonize him because he's African American," AND he's confirming that the Satan character from the Bible TV series looked like Obama, and thus it's pretty easy to demonize an African-American politician.
//This is what Republicans believe?
 
2013-03-30 04:19:58 PM

Rent Party: Right?


The guy's trolling you. I mean, you can tell that he doesn't actually believe what he's saying, right?
 
2013-03-30 04:23:43 PM

cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: The traditional definition of marriage in America is the union of one man and one woman.

Again, that is incorrect. That definition has only been around since 1964.


What was the traditional definition of marriage in America before 1964?
 
2013-03-30 04:29:38 PM

sweet jeez: LETS NOT LISTEN TO HIM HES PROBABLY THE MOST GIFTED BLACK MAN ON THE PLANET RIGHT NOW OOO I FORGOT YOU CANT BE A GIFTED BLACK MAN IF YOU NOT A DEM KIND OF LIKE MLK YOU KNOW HE WAS ON THE RIGHT TO BUT THOSE PISKY MORALS AND THE WHOLE GOD THING ........STUPID ME


Just for fun, I thought I'd post links to King's autobiography--specifically the chapter in which he discusses his decision to stay neutral in the 1960 presidential election and the chapter in which he describes his thoughts on Goldwater's nomination in 1964, as well as his work on behalf of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party at the Democratic National Convention.

http://books.google.com/books?id=pynSnGuC964C&pg=PT136&source=gbs_to c_ r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=pynSnGuC964C&pg=PT228&source=gbs_to c_ r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism. All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right. The "best man" at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.
It was both unfortunate and disastrous that the Republican Party nominated Barry Goldwater as its candidate for President of the United States. In foreign policy Mr. Goldwater advocated a narrow nationalism, a crippling isolationism, and a trigger-happy attitude that could plunge the whole world into the dark abyss of annihilation. On social and economic issues, Mr. Goldwater represented an unrealistic conservatism that was totally out of touch with the realities of the twentieth century. The issue of poverty compelled the attention of all citizens of our country. Senator Goldwater had neither the concern nor the comprehension necessary to grapple with this problem of poverty in the fashion that the historical moment dictated. On the urgent issue of civil rights, Senator Goldwater represented a philosophy that was morally indefensible and socially suicidal. While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist. His candidacy and philosophy would serve as an umbrella under which extremists of all stripes would stand. In the light of these facts and because of my love for America, I had no alternative but to urge every Negro and white person of goodwill to vote against Mr. Goldwater and to withdraw support from any Republican candidate that did not publicly disassociate himself from Senator Goldwater and his philosophy.

While I had followed a policy of not endorsing political candidates, I felt that the prospect of Senator Goldwater being President of the United States so threatened the health, morality, and survival of our nation, that I could not in good conscience fail to take a stand against what he represented.

/He also had some mean things to say about Southern Democrats in the Senate at the end of the chapter.
 
2013-03-30 04:30:29 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: My argument about reproduction


A yes, I forgot the third category: Authentic Frontier Gibberish.
 
2013-03-30 04:31:25 PM

SkinnyHead: cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: The traditional definition of marriage in America is the union of one man and one woman.

Again, that is incorrect. That definition has only been around since 1964.

What was the traditional definition of marriage in America before 1964?


Hrm... what happened in 1964... had something to do with civil rights I think...
 
2013-03-30 04:37:50 PM
BraveNewCheneyWorld:

The article referred to a study.  Like I said, try reading the article.

No, the article did not refer to a study.  The opinion piece you provided quoted two psychologist's opinions about what might happen.   But there has been an actual study done.  It's even been linked to here.   If you weren't a complete moron, and were actually interested in facts, rather than your bigotry,  you could compare the objective data gathered in that study with the subjective opinions presented by the two psychologists quoted in your opinion piece, and see how they fared.

Did you not read the underlined sentence?  I already addressed that "point".

You haven't addressed it.  You provided a failed analogy.    You either believe in equal protection, or you don't.  If the state interest is "bearing children" then anyone not able to bear children should be barred from marriage.   That would be what "equal protection means."
 
2013-03-30 04:39:17 PM

SkinnyHead: cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: The traditional definition of marriage in America is the union of one man and one woman.

Again, that is incorrect. That definition has only been around since 1964.

What was the traditional definition of marriage in America before 1964?


One white man and one white woman, or one black man and one black woman. Surely you remember that interracial marriage was not legal right?
 
2013-03-30 04:40:42 PM
BraveNewCheneyWorld: Keizer_Ghidorah: Is it seriously that difficult for you to let gays marry each other? Do you honestly think that consenting adults being allowed to marry will lead straight to legal pedophilia and bestiality? Show us on the doll where the gay people touched you. Rational people would not continue the crusade of idiocy that the two of you are hell-bent to ride until your dying breath.

I think there's a good argument to be made for the idea that an effort to normalize one form of deviancy will tend to normalize others as well.


No, there isn't, really. The fact you keep trying to compare two consenting adult humans able to enter into contracts with children unable to fully understand consent or able to enter contracts and with animals who are not human and have no concept of contracts or consent shows how dishonest and retarded you are. And you do it every single time, like the steady beat of a drum. And every time you're completely and consistently shown how false your "evidence" is and how flawed your way of thinking is, and you simply keep repeating it.

There is no legal or moral reason to deny gays the same rights and freedoms others have. Religious and personal reasons are not valid, and neither are dipshiat slippery slope fallacies.
 
2013-03-30 04:47:59 PM

cameroncrazy1984: or one black man and one black woman.


Not even that.  Traditional marriage for Blacks in the United States was: you have no right to marry, you are property of your master.  If your master approved, you might be allowed to get 'married', but that marriage did not have to be respected by any White in any way.  Your "wife" could be bred out to any man your master desired to breed with her.

This ban on interracial marriage was completely supported by biblical teachings and "common-sense" which stated that God separated the races on the Earth for a reason, to keep them separate, and the White blood lines "pure." The state's interest in keeping White blood "pure" was the stated interest for anti-miscegenation laws. Surely, if the right to ban interracial marriage was not justified for such a high reason as keeping the White blood line pure, a desire of the state to "preserve traditional marriage" whatever the hell that is supposed to mean, is not enough of a justification to allow the state to ban same-sex marriages.
 
2013-03-30 04:49:38 PM

cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: The traditional definition of marriage in America is the union of one man and one woman.

Again, that is incorrect. That definition has only been around since 1964.

What was the traditional definition of marriage in America before 1964?

One white man and one white woman, or one black man and one black woman. Surely you remember that interracial marriage was not legal right?


Certain states enacted law prohibiting interracial marriage, but those were not definitional.  They did not prohibit interracial marriage to preserve the traditional definition of marriage.  Instead Democrat Darwinists in states like Virgina (as in Loving v. Virginia) enacted those laws for the purpose of eugenics.  That was part of the progressive movement, by the way.
 
2013-03-30 04:50:28 PM

Biological Ali: The truth, though, is that there are plenty of terrible things - such as the lynching of gay people in Africa - that exist for literally no reason other than the religious beliefs that command or condone them.


More to the point: yes, people will do terrible things with or without religion, but without religion, we could at least call them on it.

Religion is the last weapon available to people who can't fight with logic.  As a society, we need to put that weapon down before we destroy ourselves with it.
 
2013-03-30 04:52:14 PM

cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: The traditional definition of marriage in America is the union of one man and one woman.

Again, that is incorrect. That definition has only been around since 19647.

What was the traditional definition of marriage in America before 19647?

One white man and one white woman, or one black man and one black woman. Surely you remember that interracial marriage was not legal right?



FTFY


The Lovings were charged under Section 20-58 of the Virginia Code, which prohibited interracial couples from being married out of state and then returning to Virginia, and Section 20-59, which classified miscegenation  as a felony, punishable by a prison sentence of between one and five years. The trial judge in the case, Leon M. Bazile stated:

"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia
 
2013-03-30 04:56:32 PM

SkinnyHead: Instead Democrat Darwinists in states like Virgina (as in Loving v. Virginia) enacted those laws for the purpose of eugenics. That was part of the progressive movement, by the way.


True, those people have a lot to answer for.  It was a sad time to be alive if you weren't a white male, or married to one.

But look what eventually happened: those people didn't get their way in the end.  They lost.  There were <i>logical</i> reasons why they were wrong, including but not limited to their misunderstanding of what you're calling "Darwinism."  We didn't need to wave a Bible at those particular bigots to make them back down.

Similarly, Biblical morality will not help us resolve our current cultural dilemmas.  It only muddies the water.
 
2013-03-30 04:59:55 PM

SkinnyHead: cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: The traditional definition of marriage in America is the union of one man and one woman.

Again, that is incorrect. That definition has only been around since 1964.

What was the traditional definition of marriage in America before 1964?

One white man and one white woman, or one black man and one black woman. Surely you remember that interracial marriage was not legal right?

Certain states enacted law prohibiting interracial marriage, but those were not definitional.  They did not prohibit interracial marriage to preserve the traditional definition of marriage.  Instead Democrat Darwinists in states like Virgina (as in Loving v. Virginia) enacted those laws for the purpose of eugenics.  That was part of the progressive movement, by the way.


So what you're saying is that there is no real traditional definition of marriage and that it changes over time?
 
2013-03-30 05:05:31 PM
Virginia (1691) was the first English colony in North America to pass a law forbidding free blacks and whites to intermarry, followed by Maryland in 1692.

In the 18th, 19th, and early 20th century, many American states passed anti-miscegenation laws, which were often defended by invoking racist interpretations of the Bible, particularly of the stories of Phinehas and of the "Curse of Ham". In 1776, seven out of the Thirteen Colonies that declared their independence enforced laws against interracial marriage.

Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Texas, South Carolina and Alabama legalized interracial marriage for some years during the Reconstruction period. Anti-miscegenation laws rested unenforced, were overturned by courts or repealed by the state government (in Arkansas[16] and Louisiana[17]). However, after conservative white Democrats took power in the South during Redemption, anti-miscegenation laws were once more enforced....

Between 1913 and 1948, 30 out of the then 48 states enforced anti-miscegenation laws.[19] Only Connecticut, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Vermont, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Alaska, Hawaii, and the federal District of Columbia never enacted them.

All from wiki.
 
2013-03-30 05:06:04 PM
So what we are to take away from this is that Dr. Ben Carlson has made statements that show him to have extensive knowledge of Pedophelia, and that Johns Hopins Supports the molestation of children while under anesthesia.
 
2013-03-30 05:12:27 PM
"The evil tendency of the crime [of adultery or fornication] is greater when committed between persons of the two races ... Its result may be the amalgamation of the two races, producing a mongrel population and a degraded civilization, the prevention of which is dictated by a sound policy affecting the highest interests of society and government." (Pace & Cox v. State, 69 Ala 231, 233 (1882)
 
2013-03-30 05:16:58 PM

Man On Pink Corner: True, those people have a lot to answer for. It was a sad time to be alive if you weren't a white male, or married to one.


It's already been posted, but the laws in question (certainly the one in Virginia) were defended on the basis of religion, not "Darwinism".
 
Ehh
2013-03-30 05:19:36 PM

LucklessWonder: Colon Powell/Condoleeza Rice '16

/Can't be worse than the last joers


They've all but publicly renounced the GOP. Funny that, huh?
 
2013-03-30 05:43:06 PM

RyogaM: Virginia (1691) was the first English colony in North America to pass a law forbidding free blacks and whites to intermarry, followed by Maryland in 1692.

In the 18th, 19th, and early 20th century, many American states passed anti-miscegenation laws, which were often defended by invoking racist interpretations of the Bible, particularly of the stories of Phinehas and of the "Curse of Ham". In 1776, seven out of the Thirteen Colonies that declared their independence enforced laws against interracial marriage.

Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Texas, South Carolina and Alabama legalized interracial marriage for some years during the Reconstruction period. Anti-miscegenation laws rested unenforced, were overturned by courts or repealed by the state government (in Arkansas[16] and Louisiana[17]). However, after conservative white Democrats took power in the South during Redemption, anti-miscegenation laws were once more enforced....

Between 1913 and 1948, 30 out of the then 48 states enforced anti-miscegenation laws.[19] Only Connecticut, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Vermont, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Alaska, Hawaii, and the federal District of Columbia never enacted them.

All from wiki.


In fairness, I don't think that anything that the Skinny One posts is actually meant to taken as factual or seriously...
 
2013-03-30 05:45:35 PM

Biological Ali: It's already been posted, but the laws in question (certainly the one in Virginia) were defended on the basis of religion, not "Darwinism".


He's right, though, in that there was a scientific subculture that also advocated eugenics and anti-miscegenation laws.  They saw a part of the picture and thought they were looking at the whole thing.

There was plenty of stupidity to go around, put it that way.
 
2013-03-30 05:50:18 PM

HighOnCraic: The trial judge in the case, Leon M. Bazile stated:


The trial judge did not write the law.  Go back to wiki and follow the link for the Racial Integrity Act of 1924.  The law was passed as part of the eugenics movement.

Man On Pink Corner: SkinnyHead: Instead Democrat Darwinists in states like Virgina (as in Loving v. Virginia) enacted those laws for the purpose of eugenics. That was part of the progressive movement, by the way.

True, those people have a lot to answer for.  It was a sad time to be alive if you weren't a white male, or married to one.

But look what eventually happened: those people didn't get their way in the end.  They lost.  There were <i>logical</i> reasons why they were wrong, including but not limited to their misunderstanding of what you're calling "Darwinism."  We didn't need to wave a Bible at those particular bigots to make them back down.

Similarly, Biblical morality will not help us resolve our current cultural dilemmas.  It only muddies the water.


But Progressives in the eugenics movement in their day insisted that they had science on their side and that they were on the right side of history.  People who did not agree with them were considered anti-science and on the wrong side of history.

cameroncrazy1984: So what you're saying is that there is no real traditional definition of marriage and that it changes over time?


No, I am saying that laws against interracial marriage did not change the definition of marriage.  The definition of marriage -- the union of one man and one woman -- has remained constant.  State laws that restrict who can marry (i.e., no marriage under a certain age, no marriage within certain degrees of consanguinity, no marriage by someone who is already married, no marriage between certain races) do not define marriage.
 
2013-03-30 05:52:59 PM

SkinnyHead: No, I am saying that laws against interracial marriage did not change the definition of marriage.  The definition of marriage -- the union of one man and one woman -- has remained constant.


No, it hasn't. As I have shown you.
 
2013-03-30 05:53:37 PM

SkinnyHead: State laws that restrict who can marry (i.e., no marriage under a certain age, no marriage within certain degrees of consanguinity, no marriage by someone who is already married, no marriage between certain races) do not define marriage.


This is hilarious. State laws that define the boundaries of marriage do not define the boundaries of marriage.

BRILLIANT TROLL
 
2013-03-30 05:55:20 PM
Hey guys the lines that are the boundaries of this box do not define this box.
 
2013-03-30 05:56:28 PM
The lines of this box have changed over time, but that doesn't mean the box has changed!
 
2013-03-30 06:13:39 PM

cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: State laws that restrict who can marry (i.e., no marriage under a certain age, no marriage within certain degrees of consanguinity, no marriage by someone who is already married, no marriage between certain races) do not define marriage.

This is hilarious. State laws that define the boundaries of marriage do not define the boundaries of marriage.

BRILLIANT TROLL


State laws that say that minors cannot drink alcohol do not change the definition of drinking alcohol. State laws that say that felons cannot possess firearms do not change the definition of possessing firearms.
 
2013-03-30 06:14:25 PM

SkinnyHead: cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: State laws that restrict who can marry (i.e., no marriage under a certain age, no marriage within certain degrees of consanguinity, no marriage by someone who is already married, no marriage between certain races) do not define marriage.

This is hilarious. State laws that define the boundaries of marriage do not define the boundaries of marriage.

BRILLIANT TROLL

State laws that say that minors cannot drink alcohol do not change the definition of drinking alcohol. State laws that say that felons cannot possess firearms do not change the definition of possessing firearms.


Yes they do. They change the definition of the legality of those actions, just as defining what marriage is defines what marriage is.
 
2013-03-30 06:20:30 PM

Man On Pink Corner: He's right, though, in that there was a scientific subculture that also advocated eugenics and anti-miscegenation laws. They saw a part of the picture and thought they were looking at the whole thing.


You've got it backwards. They were people scrambling for (rather poor) secular excuses for what was very much a religious exercise, much like people today who justify discrimination against gay people on the basis of fraudulent "research" linking them to pedophilia and what have you.
 
2013-03-30 06:24:47 PM
And actually,  SkinnyHead, you shouldn't mind the redefinition of marriage as being any two consenting non-related persons as, in your mind, laws regarding marriage don't or can't redefine marriage itself.

Right?
 
2013-03-30 06:31:55 PM

cameroncrazy1984: State laws that say that minors cannot drink alcohol do not change the definition of drinking alcohol. State laws that say that felons cannot possess firearms do not change the definition of possessing firearms.

Yes they do. They change the definition of the legality of those actions, just as defining what marriage is defines what marriage is.


Think about what you're saying.  If "drinking alcohol" is defined as "someone over 21 drinking alcohol," then the minor charged with drinking alcohol could defend by saying that he wasn't drinking alcohol, as defined by law, because he was under 21.

If Virginia's anti-miscegenation law changed the definition of marriage to mean that marriage is defined as the union of two white people or two black people, then Mildred and Richard Loving could say that their interracial marriage was not in violation of the law, because it was not a "marriage" within the definition of the law.
 
2013-03-30 06:37:37 PM

robmilmel: fusillade762: You be sure to let us know when this "precedent" happens somewhere other than a 3rd world backwater.

I just had to post this, from the Salt Lake Trib:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/56073795-90/marriage-duck-lake -s alt.html.csp


Radio DJ publicity stunt is stunty. But this made me chuckle:

The response was that the story was worth no more than four paragraphs. But if the marriage was consummated, I was to get pictures.
 
2013-03-30 06:37:55 PM

SkinnyHead: If Virginia's anti-miscegenation law changed the definition of marriage to mean that marriage is defined as the union of two white people or two black people, then Mildred and Richard Loving could say that their interracial marriage was not in violation of the law, because it was not a "marriage" within the definition of the law.


That makes zero sense. Marriage is a legal construct. If your marriage falls outside of the legal construct then it is not defined as a marriage. If you change the marriage law, the construct is changed. The definition is changed.

I don't know how you're not getting this.
 
2013-03-30 06:38:54 PM

SkinnyHead: cameroncrazy1984: State laws that say that minors cannot drink alcohol do not change the definition of drinking alcohol. State laws that say that felons cannot possess firearms do not change the definition of possessing firearms.

Yes they do. They change the definition of the legality of those actions, just as defining what marriage is defines what marriage is.

Think about what you're saying.  If "drinking alcohol" is defined as "someone over 21 drinking alcohol," then the minor charged with drinking alcohol could defend by saying that he wasn't drinking alcohol, as defined by law, because he was under 21.

If Virginia's anti-miscegenation law changed the definition of marriage to mean that marriage is defined as the union of two white people or two black people, then Mildred and Richard Loving could say that their interracial marriage was not in violation of the law, because it was not a "marriage" within the definition of the law.


"Defining what something is doesn't define what some thing is, unless it's something I'm talking about."

Dude, give it a rest already. There has NEVER been a "traditional idea of marriage" that's stayed constant since the dawn of time. And what about non-Christian concepts of "traditional" marriage? Atheist concepts of "traditional" marriage? They all existed before Christianity was invented, exist alongside it, and have all changed as well. Stop trying to argue that "one man + one woman+ has always been the way the entire world has thought for the last 400,000 years and because of that it's fine to treat gays as sub-human second-hand citizens.
 
2013-03-30 06:39:26 PM
I.E. if the state redefines marriage as between two consenting non-related adults, marriage has changed, because the definition of marriage has changed. As it has several times in the past.