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.

(Inquisitr)   Rush Limbaugh says gay people marrying will lead to acceptance of pedophilia and destroy 'traditional marriage'. None his four wives available for comment   (inquisitr.com) divider line 208
    More: Dumbass, Rush Limbaugh, same-sex marriages  
•       •       •

1008 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Jun 2013 at 1:48 PM (43 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-20 06:27:52 PM

BSABSVR: Even With A Chainsaw: whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality Hamburgers - NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.

FTFY

You need a better argument against bestiality.

You need a better concept of comparisons.


Howso?  Murder of a non-consenting animal is ok, but rape is not?

I'm not arguing for bestiality, but I am calling into question the idea that "consent" is the right logical course of argumentation to take.
 
2013-06-20 06:33:31 PM
To paraphrase what Colbert said about Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh has had twice as many wives as both Mormons in the 2012 GOP Primaries combined!


Arkanaut: Corvus: Remember "Traditional Marriage" was basically a man OWNING his wife.

Hold on, they'll be getting around to that part.


FloydA: Only untiless he died without a male heir. After that, his brother owned her long enough to generate said heir.


/FT4Y

joeshill: Corvus: Remember "Traditional Marriage" was basically a man OWNING his wifes.

FTFY

Ex 21:10 If he take him another wife....
De 21:15 If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated....


I'll see you those and raise you II Samuel 12:8, in which the LORD God Himself, through His Prophet Nathan (the one who anointed David as King), point-blank told David that He Himself personally gave David the wives of his former master King Saul unto his bosom.
 
2013-06-20 07:03:21 PM

Even With A Chainsaw: BSABSVR: Even With A Chainsaw: whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality Hamburgers - NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.

FTFY

You need a better argument against bestiality.

You need a better concept of comparisons.

Howso?  Murder of a non-consenting animal is ok, but rape is not?

I'm not arguing for bestiality, but I am calling into question the idea that "consent" is the right logical course of argumentation to take.


Ah, so you're from PETA.

There's a difference between eating an animal and farking an animal. Just like there's a difference between CONSENSUAL HUMAN BEINGS getting together and a human farking an animal.

And if we're going to talk "consent to being killed and devoured", you better go out and tell those mean and evil carnivores to stop that meaniness and ask for their prey's consent.
 
2013-06-20 07:03:33 PM

whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality- NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.


Are chickens capable of consenting to... uh, "relations"?

Because I've never heard of a chicken-human hybrid, which means all those episodes of chicken-human "relations" must have been legitimate rape.

I'm just asking.  For a friend.
 
2013-06-20 07:36:06 PM

ManateeGag: why can't this fat fark just die of a heart attack already.


I'm glad it only took to post number two to break out the fat joke.  On Michael Moore threads it usually takes until the fifth comment. This proves Fark's librul bias.
 
2013-06-20 08:04:14 PM

jaytkay: Cythraul: When in the blue fark was NAMBLA an 'accepted' part of the LGBT community?

Not the whole community.

Just the closeted Republicans.


At the Gay Pride parade in NYC, they were allowed to have their own float in the parade.  This was some years back and the local media made sure to get pictures of them to publish in the local papers.  I'm guessing the parade organizers realized it made them (all gays) look bad to continue allowing them (NAMBLA) so they stopped allowing them in the parade.
 
2013-06-20 08:10:35 PM
Do you think he ever thinks about how many families and lives he has ruined by spreading this poisonous lie? I wonder how many gay teens have killed themselves because their parents believed Rush, heart and soul, and abused or shunned subsequently?

Tell me, Rush, what do you think your body count is, you slimy pile of shiat?
 
2013-06-20 08:11:35 PM

Cythraul: ScreamingHangover: Aarontology: Man, why are all these anti-gay conservatives so obsessed with f*cking children?

It's like all they can think about. Two dudes holding hands and their minds go right to raping a child.

You'll find this mostly amongst the older conservatives: the ones who remember when Nambla was an active and accepted part of the LGBT community for over a decade, openly participating in gay pride parades and events.

The LGBT community threw Nambla under the bus in the mid-90's when they realize it was hurting the cause, but that doesn't stop the fact that Nambla members were once accepted amongst their ranks. Link

Personally, I support gay marriage. However, much like Christians (or any other group), the LGBT community also has some skeletons in the closet.

When in the blue fark was NAMBLA an 'accepted' part of the LGBT community?


Having their own float in the Gay Pride parade would be an indication of that.
www.biblestudysite.com

May not be true today, but they do have some skeletons in their closet.
 
2013-06-20 08:17:52 PM

FloydA: Cythraul:

Even if what you say is true, you should narrow your accusations down a little. What is the 'LGBT community' in this instance? I'm a member of the LGBT community, and I, and anyone else I know in the LGBT community sure as hell would never support NAMBLA.

They never really had much support, and there was active opposition to including them right from the beginning.  GLAAD didn't make an official statement about NAMBLA until 1994, so I suppose that's what  ScreamingHangover is referring to as "acceptance."


So until 1994 GLADD was doing this in regards to them.
t0.gstatic.com
 
2013-06-20 08:24:16 PM

Latinwolf: May not be true today, but they do have some skeletons in their closet.


And that's the big difference between the gay community, and a moral authority like the Catholic Church.

The gay community rose up and expelled NAMBLA from its attempts to associate. The reason it's not true today is because gay people put an end to it.

The moral authority, on the other hand, moved its army of predators around and kept them hidden. The reason it's still true today is because the leadership didn't do a thing.
 
2013-06-20 08:39:58 PM

Lutrasimilis: Cythraul: When in the blue fark was NAMBLA an 'accepted' part of the LGBT community?

It wasn't. But conservatives are still trying to find an equalizer for the whole Catholic sex abuse thing, so they pretend that was the case.


Lutrasimilis: In this instance, the LGBT community is a person called Harry Hay. And he didn't even support NAMBLA, he just said it seemed hypocritical of the gay community to utterly reject them the way that it had since their inception.


Lutrasimilis: You might as well claim that Christians support child molestation because fundamentalist Mormons believe they have the right to underage spirit brides.

Deal with it. That's how facts work.


Lutrasimilis: And that's the big difference between the gay community, and a moral authority like the Catholic Church.

The gay community rose up and expelled NAMBLA from its attempts to associate. The reason it's not true today is because gay people put an end to it.


I like how you started out with a categorical denial.
....then claimed it was a few fringe examples,
...then pointed the finger at someone else.
... and now admit Nambla was a part of the community.


You're still in denial about a whole decade of participation, but at least progress is being made.
 
2013-06-20 08:58:11 PM

Even With A Chainsaw: BSABSVR: Even With A Chainsaw: whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality Hamburgers - NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.

FTFY

You need a better argument against bestiality.

You need a better concept of comparisons.

Howso?  Murder of a non-consenting animal is ok, but rape is not?


Where to start?  For one, food animals are not the same as pets or (ugh) hump animals typically.  For another thing, killing an animal humanely is not the same thing as ass farking one for funsies.  Causing an animal pain for your own pleasure is sadistic behavior.  Humanely killing an animal to make into food, or clothing or what have you is acceptable even if people don't want to think about the details.  Penetrating an animal that is not built for it is not significantly removed from tying fire crackers to a cat's tail.

Mostly, it's that you are not making a fair comparison.  Even a 7th level vegan is going to be OK with me wanting to eat a red onion.  maybe I even really dig red onions, to the point where I eat them on everything all the time.  Maybe I even evangelize to my friends and co workers how awesome red onion is.  Sure that would get me some eyerolls, maybe an unflattering nickname or two, but that's about as far as it goes.

If I wandered around talking about how I just love to dig holes in a red onion to fark it hard, and if I don't have knife, I just slap an onion with my cock, and boy you have no idea what sexy is until you see your load dripping down the side of an onion bulb; I would be (rightly) drummed from normal society.
 
2013-06-20 09:19:10 PM

BSABSVR: Even With A Chainsaw: BSABSVR: Even With A Chainsaw: whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality Hamburgers - NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.

FTFY

You need a better argument against bestiality.

You need a better concept of comparisons.

Howso?  Murder of a non-consenting animal is ok, but rape is not?

Where to start?  For one, food animals are not the same as pets or (ugh) hump animals typically.  For another thing, killing an animal humanely is not the same thing as ass farking one for funsies.  Causing an animal pain for your own pleasure is sadistic behavior.  Humanely killing an animal to make into food, or clothing or what have you is acceptable even if people don't want to think about the details.  Penetrating an animal that is not built for it is not significantly removed from tying fire crackers to a cat's tail.

Mostly, it's that you are not making a fair comparison.  Even a 7th level vegan is going to be OK with me wanting to eat a red onion.  maybe I even really dig red onions, to the point where I eat them on everything all the time.  Maybe I even evangelize to my friends and co workers how awesome red onion is.  Sure that would get me some eyerolls, maybe an unflattering nickname or two, but that's about as far as it goes.

If I wandered around talking about how I just love to dig holes in a red onion to fark it hard, and if I don't have knife, I just slap an onion with my cock, and boy you have no idea what sexy is until you see your load dripping down the side of an onion bulb; I would be (rightly) drummed from normal society.


By the way, rubbing your junk with a stainless steel soap bar (e.g. the Amco Rub-A-Way Bar) gets rid of that onion smell.  Also removes fishy odors.

img.fark.net

Washing "down there" with table salt or baking soda also works.

Uh... that's I've been told... by a friend.  Yeah, a friend.
 
2013-06-20 09:21:54 PM

Parthenogenetic: BSABSVR: Even With A Chainsaw: BSABSVR: Even With A Chainsaw: whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality Hamburgers - NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.

FTFY

You need a better argument against bestiality.

You need a better concept of comparisons.

Howso?  Murder of a non-consenting animal is ok, but rape is not?

Where to start?  For one, food animals are not the same as pets or (ugh) hump animals typically.  For another thing, killing an animal humanely is not the same thing as ass farking one for funsies.  Causing an animal pain for your own pleasure is sadistic behavior.  Humanely killing an animal to make into food, or clothing or what have you is acceptable even if people don't want to think about the details.  Penetrating an animal that is not built for it is not significantly removed from tying fire crackers to a cat's tail.

Mostly, it's that you are not making a fair comparison.  Even a 7th level vegan is going to be OK with me wanting to eat a red onion.  maybe I even really dig red onions, to the point where I eat them on everything all the time.  Maybe I even evangelize to my friends and co workers how awesome red onion is.  Sure that would get me some eyerolls, maybe an unflattering nickname or two, but that's about as far as it goes.

If I wandered around talking about how I just love to dig holes in a red onion to fark it hard, and if I don't have knife, I just slap an onion with my cock, and boy you have no idea what sexy is until you see your load dripping down the side of an onion bulb; I would be (rightly) drummed from normal society.

By the way, rubbing your junk with a stainless steel soap bar (e.g. the Amco Rub-A-Way Bar) gets rid of that onion smell.  Also removes fishy odors.

[img.fark.net image 500x465]

Washing "down there" with table salt or baking soda also works.

Uh... that's I'v ...


COPY-->PASTE-->Save As....
 
2013-06-20 09:32:52 PM

BSABSVR: Even With A Chainsaw: BSABSVR: Even With A Chainsaw: whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality Hamburgers - NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.

FTFY

You need a better argument against bestiality.

You need a better concept of comparisons.

Howso?  Murder of a non-consenting animal is ok, but rape is not?

Where to start?  For one, food animals are not the same as pets or (ugh) hump animals typically.  For another thing, killing an animal humanely is not the same thing as ass farking one for funsies.  Causing an animal pain for your own pleasure is sadistic behavior.  Humanely killing an animal to make into food, or clothing or what have you is acceptable even if people don't want to think about the details.  Penetrating an animal that is not built for it is not significantly removed from tying fire crackers to a cat's tail.

Mostly, it's that you are not making a fair comparison.  Even a 7th level vegan is going to be OK with me wanting to eat a red onion.  maybe I even really dig red onions, to the point where I eat them on everything all the time.  Maybe I even evangelize to my friends and co workers how awesome red onion is.  Sure that would get me some eyerolls, maybe an unflattering nickname or two, but that's about as far as it goes.

If I wandered around talking about how I just love to dig holes in a red onion to fark it hard, and if I don't have knife, I just slap an onion with my cock, and boy you have no idea what sexy is until you see your load dripping down the side of an onion bulb; I would be (rightly) drummed from normal society.


All I was saying was that the "consent" argument was terribly reasoned.  We don't ask animals to consent to anything else, so it must be something else about farking them that we find a problem with.  You hit on the idea that it was basically animal abuse - just as we would find someone criminally liable for beating their dog, farking them is similarly off the table.

That's all I really wanted to get at.
 
2013-06-20 09:42:45 PM

Cythraul: ScreamingHangover: Cythraul: ScreamingHangover: Aarontology: Man, why are all these anti-gay conservatives so obsessed with f*cking children?

It's like all they can think about. Two dudes holding hands and their minds go right to raping a child.

You'll find this mostly amongst the older conservatives: the ones who remember when Nambla was an active and accepted part of the LGBT community for over a decade, openly participating in gay pride parades and events.

The LGBT community threw Nambla under the bus in the mid-90's when they realize it was hurting the cause, but that doesn't stop the fact that Nambla members were once accepted amongst their ranks. Link

Personally, I support gay marriage. However, much like Christians (or any other group), the LGBT community also has some skeletons in the closet.

When in the blue fark was NAMBLA an 'accepted' part of the LGBT community?

RTFA: The 80's. They openly participated in LGBT events. As I said, it wasn't until the mid -90s that the LGBT community threw them under the bus and whitewashed the whole thing

Even if what you say is true, you should narrow your accusations down a little. What is the 'LGBT community' in this instance? I'm a member of the LGBT community, and I, and anyone else I know in the LGBT community sure as hell would never support NAMBLA.


What he says isn't even remotely true. In the 70's, a gay activist named Harry Hay insisted NAMBLA be included in the gay pride parade in NY, and they were, until the early 80's, when other gay activists began to object. Harry Hay protested loudly and continued to support NAMBLA into the mid and late 80's, but he was shunned by the rest of the gay community as a whole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Hay
 
2013-06-20 09:43:55 PM

ScreamingHangover: I like how you started out with a categorical denial.
....then claimed it was a few fringe examples,
...then pointed the finger at someone else.
... and now admit Nambla was a part of the community.


You're still in denial about a whole decade of participation, but at least progress is being made.


You started out with:

You'll find this mostly amongst the older conservatives: the ones who remember when Nambla was an active and accepted part of the LGBT community for over a decade, openly participating in gay pride parades and events.

For one, it's a weak rationalization to begin with, since it's unlikely that any of these bigoted conservatives are actually familiar enough with gay pride rallies to know who actually attended. They're more likely just throwing out these accusations out of general idiocy and bigotry, as with their delusional rants about bestiality. Just apply Occam's Razor rather than coming up with some convoluted explanation based on what you think they "remember".

Second, a brief period of attendance at pride events is a very, very weak criterion for "active and accepted part of the LGBT community", since (as per your own link) they were opposed by many prominent LGBT leaders and organizations right from the start.

In other words, the only way your argument can be sustained is if we dilute the meaning of words like "accepted" to near-meaninglessness.
 
2013-06-20 09:46:02 PM

FloydA: Corvus: Remember "Traditional Marriage" was basically a man OWNING his wife.

Only until he died.  After that, his brother owned her.


Oh lordy, if my husband died and they told me I was now the property/spouse of his mouth breathing, furry man-titted aspie brother, I would hang myself.
 
2013-06-20 09:52:57 PM

2 grams: Rush wasn't associating homosexuality to pediphile rape.

The article's headline as well as the subby's is way off base and misleading to say the least..

Half of the posts in this thread have thier head up thier ass.   What Limbaugh did was claim that changing the language of the discussion can sway public acceptance of an idea.

Just as many people who were once against gay marraige came to accept it, he claims because the language about it changed.

Rush then said that there are groups that are trying to normalize pediphile and doing so by addressing it as an alternative life style and change the language of the discussion to sway people.

You can agree with him, disagree, i don't farking care but claiming Rush Limbaugh is linking homosexaul marraige to pediphile rape is welll, you're either lying or ignorant.


No, the liar is you. Rush is claiming that "liberals" are trying to "normalize" pedophilia and they're doing it the same way they normalized gay marriage, by changing the language. (Never mind that this isn't even happening, but whatever).
(That's how all movements are done, by the way. It's one one side calls it "Pro Life" and the other calls it "Pro Choice". Language matters).
So why didn't Rush say that women voting and owning property was once unthinkable, just as legalized pedophilia is unthinkable now? Well, because he's not trying to establish a link between those two things in anyone's minds, and he can't publicly admit that he's opposed to women voting and owning property either. But he is, however, trying to establish a link between homosexuality (which he calls "gay marriage", but let's not kid ourselves) and pedophilia. And he does it because he thinks if he and Ben Cason and Rick Santorum and Pat Robertson and Michelle Bachman and every other social conservative  constantly say "gay" and "pedophile" in the same sentence, people will establish that link.
And apparently some people are falling for it.
 
2013-06-20 09:56:57 PM

codergirl42: IamTomJoad: codergirl42: I've been "gay" married for a year and I haven't raped a child yet.

According to Rush that was supposed to happen at your bachelors party.

I am not even sure if you are really married if that didn't happen. You might wanna check your local ordinances.

How many traditional marriages have you destroyed in the last year?

In fact I am really doubting your commitment to the "gay agenda" (or as the republicans know it Sparkle Motion.)

We Thought The Marriage Destruction Ritual Involved Turtles So Maybe We Did Something Wrong.


THE TURTLES!?!?

My god don't you even read the newsletters?

It clearly states in section 32 paragraph 7 and I quote "specific animals will be used for specific marriage destruction"

But I will be keeping an eye on Mitch McConnell's marriage viability.

I am almost afraid to ask if you are sure you kept only your left sock on as you hopped around the smoldering ashes of the flag, a portrait of Regan and two copies from Ayan Rand. If not I suggest reporting to re-education camp on Fire Island July 5-7.

Brunch is included
 
2013-06-20 10:00:18 PM

Even With A Chainsaw: BSABSVR: Even With A Chainsaw: whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality Hamburgers - NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.

FTFY

You need a better argument against bestiality.

You need a better concept of comparisons.

Howso?  Murder of a non-consenting animal is ok, but rape is not?

I'm not arguing for bestiality, but I am calling into question the idea that "consent" is the right logical course of argumentation to take.


We don't allow inhumane treatment of animals, even if we do kill and eat them on the regular. Most people consider farking a sheep to be inhumane to the sheep.
Frankly, I don't care that much about animals or their rights, though I would be very squicked out if a dude told me he farked sheep.
 
2013-06-20 10:04:39 PM

Latinwolf: Cythraul: ScreamingHangover: Aarontology: Man, why are all these anti-gay conservatives so obsessed with f*cking children?

It's like all they can think about. Two dudes holding hands and their minds go right to raping a child.

You'll find this mostly amongst the older conservatives: the ones who remember when Nambla was an active and accepted part of the LGBT community for over a decade, openly participating in gay pride parades and events.

The LGBT community threw Nambla under the bus in the mid-90's when they realize it was hurting the cause, but that doesn't stop the fact that Nambla members were once accepted amongst their ranks. Link

Personally, I support gay marriage. However, much like Christians (or any other group), the LGBT community also has some skeletons in the closet.

When in the blue fark was NAMBLA an 'accepted' part of the LGBT community?

Having their own float in the Gay Pride parade would be an indication of that.
[www.biblestudysite.com image 393x285]

May not be true today, but they do have some skeletons in their closet.


And? Your point? Should we scan the signs at the latest Tea Party rally and then declare that that is what all Republicans believe?
 In the 70's when the gay rights movement was in it's infancy, there were radicals who thought any restrictions on sex was wrong. There's really no way of telling how many there were, or even how many of those marching even knew what NAMBLA was. In 1980, lesbian groups began protesting NAMBLA's inclusion in gay pride parades, and they were banned by 1981.
 
2013-06-20 10:10:44 PM

ScreamingHangover: Lutrasimilis: Cythraul: When in the blue fark was NAMBLA an 'accepted' part of the LGBT community?

It wasn't. But conservatives are still trying to find an equalizer for the whole Catholic sex abuse thing, so they pretend that was the case.

Lutrasimilis: In this instance, the LGBT community is a person called Harry Hay. And he didn't even support NAMBLA, he just said it seemed hypocritical of the gay community to utterly reject them the way that it had since their inception.

Lutrasimilis: You might as well claim that Christians support child molestation because fundamentalist Mormons believe they have the right to underage spirit brides.

Deal with it. That's how facts work.

Lutrasimilis: And that's the big difference between the gay community, and a moral authority like the Catholic Church.

The gay community rose up and expelled NAMBLA from its attempts to associate. The reason it's not true today is because gay people put an end to it.

I like how you started out with a categorical denial.
....then claimed it was a few fringe examples,
...then pointed the finger at someone else.
... and now admit Nambla was a part of the community.


You're still in denial about a whole decade of participation, but at least progress is being made.


Legitimate question.

Is this perhaps your premiss for your psych/sociology thesis?

You seem really invested in trying to give cover for bigoted ideas by pointing out events that took place one day a year some 20 years ago.

Was it that tramatic for you or are you postulating that it was such a breach of social norms that people that witnessed it have been permanently warped 20 years later?
 
2013-06-20 10:25:53 PM

Biological Ali: ScreamingHangover: I like how you started out with a categorical denial.
....then claimed it was a few fringe examples,
...then pointed the finger at someone else.
... and now admit Nambla was a part of the community.


You're still in denial about a whole decade of participation, but at least progress is being made.

You started out with:

You'll find this mostly amongst the older conservatives: the ones who remember when Nambla was an active and accepted part of the LGBT community for over a decade, openly participating in gay pride parades and events.

For one, it's a weak rationalization to begin with, since it's unlikely that any of these bigoted conservatives are actually familiar enough with gay pride rallies to know who actually attended. They're more likely just throwing out these accusations out of general idiocy and bigotry, as with their delusional rants about bestiality. Just apply Occam's Razor rather than coming up with some convoluted explanation based on what you think they "remember".

Second, a brief period of attendance at pride events is a very, very weak criterion for "active and accepted part of the LGBT community", since (as per your own link) they were opposed by many prominent LGBT leaders and organizations right from the start.

In other words, the only way your argument can be sustained is if we dilute the meaning of words like "accepted" to near-meaninglessness.


I also love the idea that "older conservatives" were incredibly well-informed about the gay rights movement in the 70's and knew all the ins and outs of it,,,and then apparently went into a deep coma until a couple years ago.
 
2013-06-20 11:43:51 PM

Ed Grubermann: FTFA: There is a movement on to normalize pedophilia, and I guarantee you your reaction to that is probably much the same as your reaction when you first heard about gay marriage.

If by "much the same" you mean "completely the opposite", then yes.


The difference of course also being that the "movement on to normalize pedophilia" remains the same small group of perverts and deviates it was when it started; there is no groundswell of support for NAMBLA in the past 40 years like there was for gay rights. Nobody wants to make boy-loving legal like they wanted to make sex between consenting adults legal, and that, dear Rushbo, is the big difference between pedophilia and gay marriage.

There will never be a big acceptance of letting people do things to kids, no matter how much perverts like Rush desperately want there to be. Sorry.
 
2013-06-21 12:15:43 AM

Biological Ali: ScreamingHangover: I like how you started out with a categorical denial.
....then claimed it was a few fringe examples,
...then pointed the finger at someone else.
... and now admit Nambla was a part of the community.


You're still in denial about a whole decade of participation, but at least progress is being made.

You started out with:

You'll find this mostly amongst the older conservatives: the ones who remember when Nambla was an active and accepted part of the LGBT community for over a decade, openly participating in gay pride parades and events.

For one, it's a weak rationalization to begin with, since it's unlikely that any of these bigoted conservatives are actually familiar enough with gay pride rallies to know who actually attended. They're more likely just throwing out these accusations out of general idiocy and bigotry, as with their delusional rants about bestiality. Just apply Occam's Razor rather than coming up with some convoluted explanation based on what you think they "remember".

Second, a brief period of attendance at pride events is a very, very weak criterion for "active and accepted part of the LGBT community", since (as per your own link) they were opposed by many prominent LGBT leaders and organizations right from the start.

In other words, the only way your argument can be sustained is if we dilute the meaning of words like "accepted" to near-meaninglessness.


How many straight people were accepting of the slave owner community back when that was legal under the constitution?
 
2013-06-21 01:02:11 AM
The only people who rail against gays are closeted and the only people who rail against equality in family are low-lifes who cannot stay married. That's how I see it.

Personal liberty should be the only talking point here. Either it exists or it doesn't, you fake farking 'conservatives'.
 
2013-06-21 01:52:55 AM
Rush Limbaugh ate a halibut so how can he be opposed to Jeffrey Dahmer eating people?
 
2013-06-21 02:02:52 AM

Noam Chimpsky: Rush Limbaugh ate a halibut so how can he be opposed to Jeffrey Dahmer eating people?


Is he?
 
2013-06-21 02:43:57 AM
Rush Limbaugh says gay people marrying will lead to acceptance of pedophilia and destroy 'traditional marriage'. None his 4 wives available for comment

I suppose none of the un-numbered Dominican "cabana boys" have anything to say either.
 
2013-06-21 04:06:17 AM
"The lardy doth protest too much, methinks."
 
2013-06-21 05:42:27 AM
Yay, slippery slope arguments!


We're cooking peanut butter brittle, Mr. White?

img.fark.net

Peanut brittle is the gateway candy, Jesse.
From brittle we move on to nougat.
He who controls the nougat
controls EVERYTHING.
 
2013-06-21 07:15:15 AM

whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality- NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.


Even if a CHILD CONSENTED ITS STILL WRONG! You sick NAMBLA freak! Your post is exactly what nambla is about, removing penalties from sex with children who "consented".

Way to prove conservatives right... You are so progressive that you already accept the feared definition of pedophilia that conservatives think will be fought for.
 
2013-06-21 07:25:52 AM

1nsanilicious: whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality- NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.

Even if a CHILD CONSENTED ITS STILL WRONG! You sick NAMBLA freak! Your post is exactly what nambla is about, removing penalties from sex with children who "consented".

Way to prove conservatives right... You are so progressive that you already accept the feared definition of pedophilia that conservatives think will be fought for.


The point is- legally and morally, children *cannot* consent to a sexual relationship with an adult. It is the same reason why there are statutory rape laws, even for heterosexual sex. So the slippery slope is a red herring.

It's dumb anyway. Heterosexual marriage does not and has not normalized adult men sleeping with female children. Right?
 
2013-06-21 07:28:26 AM

Corvus: Remember "Traditional Marriage" was basically a man OWNING his wife.


img.fark.net
 
2013-06-21 08:23:07 AM

Eddie Barzoom: 1nsanilicious: whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality- NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.

Even if a CHILD CONSENTED ITS STILL WRONG! You sick NAMBLA freak! Your post is exactly what nambla is about, removing penalties from sex with children who "consented".

Way to prove conservatives right... You are so progressive that you already accept the feared definition of pedophilia that conservatives think will be fought for.

The point is- legally and morally, children *cannot* consent to a sexual relationship with an adult. It is the same reason why there are statutory rape laws, even for heterosexual sex. So the slippery slope is a red herring.

It's dumb anyway. Heterosexual marriage does not and has not normalized adult men sleeping with female children. Right?


.

You are sick
 
2013-06-21 09:12:05 AM

theorellior: Farxist: Well, at least I know which alts you use.

All of them. Fark is only me talking to myself, and your lame troll account.


Ha! Good one.

/On mobile, no funny button
 
2013-06-21 09:21:34 AM

Noam Chimpsky: Rush Limbaugh ate a halibut so how can he be opposed to Jeffrey Dahmer eating people?


Worst.
Analogy.
Evar.
 
2013-06-21 09:24:07 AM

1nsanilicious: whitman00: Two gay people- Consenting adults.

Pedophilia- NON CONSENTING CHILD
Bestiality- NON CONSENTING ANIMAL

That's why liberals accept gay relationships and gay marriage and will always be opposed to pedophilia and bestiality.

Even if a CHILD CONSENTED ITS STILL WRONG! You sick NAMBLA freak! Your post is exactly what nambla is about, removing penalties from sex with children who "consented".

Way to prove conservatives right... You are so progressive that you already accept the feared definition of pedophilia that conservatives think will be fought for.


Children cannot legally consent, your argument is invalid
 
2013-06-21 10:15:54 AM

thismomentinblackhistory: He's so boring.


I'll listen to him at lunch occasionally.  After he lost all but two of his sponsors, he would say things that were over the top offensive, and I realized He's just trying to be the conservative version of Howard Stern.  It's going over as well as the conservative version of the Daily Show.  Really sad.

Aside from that he rambles on for 20 minutes to get to part of a point which he promises to cover later.  I never have the patience to see if he ever gets around to that point.  I can't imagine anyone listening to him to make one point an hour.
 
2013-06-21 01:06:39 PM

GhostFish: Prey4reign: Why are hotel keepers so glad about same sex marriage?


Because, with them having their shiat packed all the time, patrons occupying the Honeymoon Suites will have a better chance of getting out of the hotel alive in case of a fire.

Most anal sex between heterosexuals.


Yay for Gen Y women.
 
2013-06-21 02:53:26 PM

ScreamingHangover: Aarontology: Man, why are all these anti-gay conservatives so obsessed with f*cking children?

It's like all they can think about. Two dudes holding hands and their minds go right to raping a child.

You'll find this mostly amongst the older conservatives: the ones who remember when Nambla was an active and accepted part of the LGBT community for over a decade, openly participating in gay pride parades and events.

The LGBT community threw Nambla under the bus in the mid-90's when they realize it was hurting the cause, but that doesn't stop the fact that Nambla members were once accepted amongst their ranks. Link

Personally, I support gay marriage. However, much like Christians (or any other group), the LGBT community also has some skeletons in the closet.


I wish they threw 'em under the bus literally.
/all I'm saying is that we should kill all the pedos.
 
2013-06-21 05:14:27 PM

ScreamingHangover: Aarontology: Man, why are all these anti-gay conservatives so obsessed with f*cking children?

It's like all they can think about. Two dudes holding hands and their minds go right to raping a child.

You'll find this mostly amongst the older conservatives: the ones who remember when Nambla was an active and accepted part of the LGBT community for over a decade, openly participating in gay pride parades and events.

The LGBT community threw Nambla under the bus in the mid-90's when they realize it was hurting the cause, but that doesn't stop the fact that Nambla members were once accepted amongst their ranks. Link

Personally, I support gay marriage. However, much like Christians (or any other group), the LGBT community also has some skeletons in the closet.


You know what's missing from that article? Actual evidence that NAMBLA  was even involved in said groups and it wasn't a load of bullshiat.

/Not everything you read on the internet is true.
//Shocking, I know.
 
2013-06-21 05:18:23 PM

Noam Chimpsky: Rush Limbaugh ate a halibut so how can he be opposed to Jeffrey Dahmer eating people?


Aren't humans considered "long pork"? So a proper (yet still retarded) analogy would be "Whoever eats pork products condones cannibalism".
 
2013-06-21 05:20:14 PM

Eddie Barzoom: It's dumb anyway. Heterosexual marriage does not and has not normalized adult men sleeping with female children. Right?


Well, there was the practice of older men marrying women as young as 12 back in olden times. And the entire betrothal process.
 
2013-06-21 05:45:39 PM

PsiChick: ScreamingHangover: Aarontology: Man, why are all these anti-gay conservatives so obsessed with f*cking children?

It's like all they can think about. Two dudes holding hands and their minds go right to raping a child.

You'll find this mostly amongst the older conservatives: the ones who remember when Nambla was an active and accepted part of the LGBT community for over a decade, openly participating in gay pride parades and events.

The LGBT community threw Nambla under the bus in the mid-90's when they realize it was hurting the cause, but that doesn't stop the fact that Nambla members were once accepted amongst their ranks. Link

Personally, I support gay marriage. However, much like Christians (or any other group), the LGBT community also has some skeletons in the closet.

You know what's missing from that article? Actual evidence that NAMBLA  was even involved in said groups and it wasn't a load of bullshiat.

/Not everything you read on the internet is true.
//Shocking, I know.


NAMBLA was the first member of the IGLA.  However their participation in LGBT events, or even their association with gay advocacy group was strongly and consistently opposed since the beginning of the Gay Rights movement.

You can't believe everything you read on the internet, and you can't immediately dismiss anything simply because it's on the internet.
 
2013-06-21 05:46:23 PM

thamike: NAMBLA was the first US based member of the IGLA.

 
2013-06-21 06:02:29 PM

thamike: thamike: NAMBLA was the first US based member of the IGLA.


Again:  Where the hell is the citation for this? I'm not dissing it because it's on the internet, I'm dissing it because  they did not actually provide proof of this.
 
2013-06-21 06:58:20 PM

PsiChick: thamike: thamike: NAMBLA was the first US based member of the IGLA.

Again:  Where the hell is the citation for this? I'm not dissing it because it's on the internet, I'm dissing it because  they did not actually provide proof of this.


Maybe they didn't, but that's not my problem.  If you wiki NAMBLA, you'll get all the citations you need.  I wasn't addressing the form, but the content.  The implication might have more nefarious than the truth, but to say "NAMBLA is a skeleton in the Gay Rights closet," I don't think the statement alone is that outrageous.  To be more fair though, the statement should be "the all but completely abandoned and defunct NAMBLA movement was initially a problematic element in the LGBT movement."  The media made the NAMBLA specter stick for longer than was needed, and moral relativists with scrambled brains like Ginsberg only exacerbated it.
 
2013-06-21 07:18:25 PM

PsiChick: ScreamingHangover: Aarontology: Man, why are all these anti-gay conservatives so obsessed with f*cking children?

It's like all they can think about. Two dudes holding hands and their minds go right to raping a child.

You'll find this mostly amongst the older conservatives: the ones who remember when Nambla was an active and accepted part of the LGBT community for over a decade, openly participating in gay pride parades and events.

The LGBT community threw Nambla under the bus in the mid-90's when they realize it was hurting the cause, but that doesn't stop the fact that Nambla members were once accepted amongst their ranks. Link

Personally, I support gay marriage. However, much like Christians (or any other group), the LGBT community also has some skeletons in the closet.

You know what's missing from that article? Actual evidence that NAMBLA  was even involved in said groups and it wasn't a load of bullshiat.

/Not everything you read on the internet is true.
//Shocking, I know.


I agree. that's why I check The New York Times (1997):


I EXPLAINED why I didn't vote for Mayor Giuliani in the last election. I look at the gay pride parade coming up the avenue and I see the gay activists and they are followed by a group from Nambla, the pedophiles. And in back of the pedophiles come, smiling brightly and waving their hands, the two aspirants to be my Mayor, Mr. Dinkins and Mr. Giuliani. I couldn't under those circumstances vote for anyone that would march in a parade with pedophiles.


There are plenty more places you can look to verify this if you only pull your head out of the sand try googling "Namla parade". FYI Nambla was the ILGA's first American member.  Citation has been provided. Deal with it.
 
Displayed 50 of 208 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report