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.

(The Week)   When it comes to the gay marriage debate, the real bigots are the bigots who call bigots bigots. Bigots   (theweek.com) divider line 315
    More: Unlikely, Conor Friedersdorf, Ross Douthat, democratic government, fashion trends  
•       •       •

1358 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Mar 2014 at 1:40 PM (25 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-07 01:44:23 PM

mrshowrules: I don't have an issue with people being bigots, I have an issue with them acting on their bigotry and institutionalizing it.


What does "institutionalizing it" mean to you (or anyone here who wants to chime in), in this context?
 
2014-03-07 01:47:39 PM
That is....poorly written.

And all that talk about "tolerance" he's spouting sure doesn't make him walk the walk, only talk the talk.

I just wish for a day when "religious conservatives" would just go about their business AND QUIT TELLING EVERYONE ELSE HOW TO LIVE.
 
2014-03-07 01:48:20 PM
If you are against gay marriage, you are a bigot.  Period.  And there's nothing wrong with calling you out on it.
 
2014-03-07 01:48:27 PM

luniz5monody: What keeps the proverbial wedding photographer from:

Changing his business to a members only club by charging like $1/year membership fee. Setting up a meet and greet with the couple that is requesting services, and having them sign a contract that says "the 2 people I met with are Mr.A and Mrs. B. They are getting married, and I agree to take pictures at their wedding"

Then couldn't they be as backward and bigoted as they want by being a private club instead of a public business?


Why would Mr. A be marrying a Mrs. B? Does Mr. B know? Shouldn't it be Miss or Ms. B?

Or are we past gay marriage now and are moving on to the point where we are arguing on fark over whether the law discriminates against polygamists?
 
2014-03-07 01:50:05 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: mrshowrules: I don't have an issue with people being bigots, I have an issue with them acting on their bigotry and institutionalizing it.

What does "institutionalizing it" mean to you (or anyone here who wants to chime in), in this context?


Instituting laws that have no basis in rational fact, but deny equal rights for purely moralistic religious reasons qualifies, IMO.
 
2014-03-07 01:50:08 PM
A nasty intolerant streak runs through the argument of some gay rights supporters

Uh, yeah. People are nasty. But only one nasty side is right, and it's not the side that wants to tell other adults they can't have the same rights because they have icky sex.
 
2014-03-07 01:50:17 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: luniz5monody: What keeps the proverbial wedding photographer from:

Changing his business to a members only club by charging like $1/year membership fee. Setting up a meet and greet with the couple that is requesting services, and having them sign a contract that says "the 2 people I met with are Mr.A and Mrs. B. They are getting married, and I agree to take pictures at their wedding"

Then couldn't they be as backward and bigoted as they want by being a private club instead of a public business?

Why would Mr. A be marrying a Mrs. B? Does Mr. B know? Shouldn't it be Miss or Ms. B?

Or are we past gay marriage now and are moving on to the point where we are arguing on fark over whether the law discriminates against polygamists?


They are marrying each other simply because I hit the "r" key while typing.
 
2014-03-07 01:52:06 PM

what_now: They appear to want and expect all Americans to recognize and affirm that equal dignity, under penalty of ostracism from civilized life

Yes. That's exactly right.

You are free to be a bigot. Hate all you want. Join the Klan, fly the Confederate flag, tattoo a swastika to your forehead.

But other people will look down at you.


Came here to say this exact same thing.

Funny thing is, I actually prefer that people be more open about their bigotry.  It makes it a lot easier to avoid them.
 
2014-03-07 01:52:10 PM
Bigots hate being called bigots, because they have been mistakenly taught that freedom of sppech means they cannot suffer any consequences of their speech, by anyone.
 
2014-03-07 01:53:01 PM

SkinnyHead: The original meaning of the term "bigot" referred to people who were intolerant of the religious beliefs of others.


No
 
2014-03-07 01:53:43 PM

luniz5monody: Debeo Summa Credo: luniz5monody: What keeps the proverbial wedding photographer from:

Changing his business to a members only club by charging like $1/year membership fee. Setting up a meet and greet with the couple that is requesting services, and having them sign a contract that says "the 2 people I met with are Mr.A and Mrs. B. They are getting married, and I agree to take pictures at their wedding"

Then couldn't they be as backward and bigoted as they want by being a private club instead of a public business?

Why would Mr. A be marrying a Mrs. B? Does Mr. B know? Shouldn't it be Miss or Ms. B?

Or are we past gay marriage now and are moving on to the point where we are arguing on fark over whether the law discriminates against polygamists?

They are marrying each other simply because I hit the "r" key while typing.


Oh, ok. In that case let me say that I unequivocally support your right to make typos.
 
2014-03-07 01:54:24 PM
2.bp.blogspot.com

sometimes you have to be a bigot in order to take down bigger bigots
 
2014-03-07 01:55:16 PM

CalvinMorallis: If you are against gay marriage, you are a bigot.  Period.  And there's nothing wrong with calling you out on it.


Not necessarily. You could just be a guy in his 15th year of marriage to another guy.
 
2014-03-07 01:55:16 PM
One of the most aggravating things when reading forums or comments railing against gay marriage is that they keep bringing up the argument of "well would you expect a bakery to have to bake something for the KKK?"

First Google result for "bakery discrimination KKK"
http://tribuneherald.net/2013/08/23/kkk-wins-lawsuit-against-bakery- fo r-discrimination/
 
2014-03-07 01:55:18 PM
I don't understand what the big deal is. Why the fark does it matter who gets married?

I've only lived in Iowa for 5 or 6 years, but I can tell you that after it was legal here, nothing changed. At all. People who loved each other were able to get married. That is a good thing. The states that are fighting this have to know that eventually they are going to lose.
 
2014-03-07 01:55:48 PM

gilgigamesh: Nadie_AZ: And yet, that appears to be insufficient for some gay marriage proponents. They don't just want to win the legal right to marry. They don't just want most Americans to recognize and affirm the equal dignity of their relationships. They appear to want and expect all Americans to recognize and affirm that equal dignity, under penalty of ostracism from civilized life.

Huh?

It sounds like the author wants the law to force the public to respect his hatred of gays.

In other words, your garden variety "small government" conservative.


Did you even read the article or are you just judging this quote by itself?
 
2014-03-07 01:56:28 PM

SkinnyHead: Marcus Aurelius: SkinnyHead: The original meaning of the term "bigot" referred to people who were intolerant of the religious beliefs of others.

It's a good thing that no one is being forced to get gay married then.

Should wedding photographers be forced to photograph gay weddings, despite religious objections?


Should gay people continue to pay the taxes that allows those wedding photographers to live in a stable, modern society where something like "wedding photography" can be a means to earn a living?
 
2014-03-07 01:56:49 PM
SkinnyHead:

Religious people have rights too.  Why should a religious person have to chose between his religion and his profession?  To insist that a religious person violate his religion or give up his profession, when there are reasonable alternatives available, would be intolerant.  There's a word for that kind of intolerance.

No there's not.  There are plenty of thing religious people believe that they cannot do because it is illegal, such as marry a dozen wives or stone adulterers.  Why is it like this amiable?  Well I'm glad you asked.

There was a Supreme Court decision called Employment Division vs Smith where a Native American sued because he was fired for using Peyote. He argued that laws against his consumption of Peyote violated his religious freedom.  He lost.

Why? Because this crazy ultra liberal Justice named Antonin Scalia pointed out religious people have to follow laws, even if it violates their religious belief, unless that law was specifically intended to oppress them. To do anything else would be anarchy.  Gay marriage laws/civil rights decisions were not passed to punish Christians, they were passed to ensure the rights of that minority were protected.  Arguing that because you have a particular religious belief you should be able to violate the law goes against CONSERVATIVE principles.
 
2014-03-07 01:57:58 PM
There really isn't a rational reason to be opposed to gay marriage except bigotry. That's why.
 
2014-03-07 01:57:58 PM

Carolus99: One of the most aggravating things when reading forums or comments railing against gay marriage is that they keep bringing up the argument of "well would you expect a bakery to have to bake something for the KKK?"

First Google result for "bakery discrimination KKK"
http://tribuneherald.net/2013/08/23/kkk-wins-lawsuit-against-bakery- fo r-discrimination/


NVM
I've been duped, hoodwinked, bamboozled...etc.
 
2014-03-07 01:58:32 PM
The so-called paradox of freedom is the argument that freedom in the sense of absence of any constraining control must lead to very great restraint, since it makes the bully free to enslave the meek. The idea is, in a slightly different form, and with very different tendency, clearly expressed in Plato.
Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. - In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.
Vol. 1, Notes to the Chapters: Ch. 7, Note 4

Karl Popper
 
2014-03-07 01:58:46 PM
I just wish for a day when "religious conservatives PC Warriors" would just go about their business AND QUIT TELLING EVERYONE ELSE HOW TO LIVE.

See how that works?

Stop demanding that I accept Gay Marriage. I don't, and I'm not a bigot. I want gays to be left in peace and live their lives without harassment. My opposition has more to do with maintaining the traditional functionality of marriage (producing and rearing quality replacement citizens) and not the specter of bearded men in wedding dresses...(ewww!)
 
2014-03-07 01:59:19 PM

Gecko Gingrich: CalvinMorallis: If you are against gay marriage, you are a bigot.  Period.  And there's nothing wrong with calling you out on it.

Not necessarily. You could just be a guy in his 15th year of marriage to another guy.


rimshot!

/NTTAWWT
 
2014-03-07 02:00:23 PM

amiable: SkinnyHead:

Religious people have rights too.  Why should a religious person have to chose between his religion and his profession?  To insist that a religious person violate his religion or give up his profession, when there are reasonable alternatives available, would be intolerant.  There's a word for that kind of intolerance.

No there's not.  There are plenty of thing religious people believe that they cannot do because it is illegal, such as marry a dozen wives or stone adulterers.  Why is it like this amiable?  Well I'm glad you asked.

There was a Supreme Court decision called Employment Division vs Smith where a Native American sued because he was fired for using Peyote. He argued that laws against his consumption of Peyote violated his religious freedom.  He lost.

Why? Because this crazy ultra liberal Justice named Antonin Scalia pointed out religious people have to follow laws, even if it violates their religious belief, unless that law was specifically intended to oppress them. To do anything else would be anarchy.  Gay marriage laws/civil rights decisions were not passed to punish Christians, they were passed to ensure the rights of that minority were protected.  Arguing that because you have a particular religious belief you should be able to violate the law goes against CONSERVATIVE principles.


top making sense. you're just going to get them all worked into a froth.
 
2014-03-07 02:01:31 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: mrshowrules: I don't have an issue with people being bigots, I have an issue with them acting on their bigotry and institutionalizing it.

What does "institutionalizing it" mean to you (or anyone here who wants to chime in), in this context?


I guess I mean an institution being an important aspect of life and society (e.g., marriage, adoption, justice, military).

When you want to formalize discrimination beyond your own interaction with people in a broader sense in people's day to day life
 
2014-03-07 02:02:26 PM

mark12A: I just wish for a day when "religious conservatives PC Warriors" would just go about their business AND QUIT TELLING EVERYONE ELSE HOW TO LIVE.

See how that works?

Stop demanding that I accept Gay Marriage. I don't, and I'm not a bigot. I want gays to be left in peace and live their lives without harassment. My opposition has more to do with maintaining the traditional functionality of marriage (producing and rearing quality replacement citizens) and not the specter of bearded men in wedding dresses...(ewww!)


My advice is to go ahead and start making friends with people who still oppose interracial marriage (well, the few that are still alive anyway), because a few decades from now, they'll be the only ones left who don't consider people like you to be bigots.
 
2014-03-07 02:02:31 PM

mark12A: I just wish for a day when "religious conservatives PC Warriors" would just go about their business AND QUIT TELLING EVERYONE ELSE HOW TO LIVE.

See how that works?

Stop demanding that I accept Gay Marriage. I don't, and I'm not a bigot. I want gays to be left in peace and live their lives without harassment. My opposition has more to do with maintaining the traditional functionality of marriage (producing and rearing quality replacement citizens) and not the specter of bearded men in wedding dresses...(ewww!)


Except that's not the traditional function of marriage.
 
2014-03-07 02:02:59 PM

mark12A: traditional functionality of marriage (producing and rearing quality replacement citizens)


so, you believe women who are too old to have children or are unable to have children due to some medical condition should not be allowed to get married?  What about infertile men, are they banned from marriage?  Why is marriage required to make a baby?  If I've learned anything from Maury, it's that you don't need to be married to make a child.
 
2014-03-07 02:03:39 PM
mark12A

I just wish for a day when "religious conservatives PC Warriors" would just go about their business AND QUIT TELLING EVERYONE ELSE HOW TO LIVE.

See how that works?


I'm relatively sure no one has suggested you have to marry someone of the same sex, so they're not telling you how to live.

They're just saying you might not want to tell other people how to live as long as it doesn't hurt anyone, because it kinda makes you look like an asshole.
 
2014-03-07 02:03:50 PM

mark12A: I just wish for a day when "religious conservatives PC Warriors" would just go about their business AND QUIT TELLING EVERYONE ELSE HOW TO LIVE.

See how that works?

Stop demanding that I accept Gay Marriage. I don't, and I'm not a bigot. I want gays to be left in peace and live their lives without harassment. My opposition has more to do with maintaining the traditional functionality of marriage (producing and rearing quality replacement citizens) and not the specter of bearded men in wedding dresses...(ewww!)


How do you define the traditional functionality of marriage?
 
2014-03-07 02:04:01 PM

Carolus99: One of the most aggravating things when reading forums or comments railing against gay marriage is that they keep bringing up the argument of "well would you expect a bakery to have to bake something for the KKK?"

First Google result for "bakery discrimination KKK"
http://tribuneherald.net/2013/08/23/kkk-wins-lawsuit-against-bakery- fo r-discrimination/


Second Google Result:
UPDATE: Apparently, the "news story" that prompted this post is a fake.
 
2014-03-07 02:05:00 PM

mark12A: My opposition has more to do with maintaining the traditional functionality of marriage (producing and rearing quality replacement citizens) and not the specter of bearded men in wedding dresses...(ewww!)


How will allowing gays to marry diminish the:
a. Child output of heterosexual unions?
b. Adopting/child-rearing abilities of gays?
c. Enforcement of marriage as a child-rearing legal obligation?

How does it affect your rights at all, in fact?
 
2014-03-07 02:05:37 PM

Pincy: what_now: They appear to want and expect all Americans to recognize and affirm that equal dignity, under penalty of ostracism from civilized life

Yes. That's exactly right.

You are free to be a bigot. Hate all you want. Join the Klan, fly the Confederate flag, tattoo a swastika to your forehead.

But other people will look down at you.

Came here to say this exact same thing.

Funny thing is, I actually prefer that people be more open about their bigotry.  It makes it a lot easier to avoid them.


Same with gay people. Some are rather obvious about it, and are therefore easy to avoid. Whereas others aren't noticeably gay and there is no way to immediately recognize that they are. Maybe they are single despite being reasonable looking and successful, maybe they dont like sports as much as regular guys do, maybe they don't ogle women or make off color comments, etc., so you can speculate that they are gay but you can't really tell.

I know this makes me sound bigoted to those here who are intolerant of those who aren't PC, but it is really aggravating when you meet a gay person who seems outwardly normal and doesn't make it apparent that he's gay.

You might start hanging out with the person, talking about sports or electronics or cars, bringing him to group events to meet your other buddies, inviting him to poker night, having sex a few times, going ballgames together and whatnot, THEN finding out he's a homo. I know they didn't choose to be gay but not disclosing it upfront is horribly rude IMO.
 
2014-03-07 02:07:12 PM
Friedersdorf wrote, because it assumes that "homophobia, anti-gay bigotry, and hatred are obviously what's motivating anyone who declines to provide a service for a gay wedding," when in fact, plenty of gay marriage opponents merely reject it because they regard "marriage as a religious sacrament with a procreative purpose." And that is fundamentally different from bigotry.

Which is of course why they also think that infertile couples, the elderly, or the previously divorced should be denied the sacrement of a nice floral arrangement.
 
2014-03-07 02:07:46 PM

luniz5monody: Debeo Summa Credo: luniz5monody: What keeps the proverbial wedding photographer from:

Changing his business to a members only club by charging like $1/year membership fee. Setting up a meet and greet with the couple that is requesting services, and having them sign a contract that says "the 2 people I met with are Mr.A and Mrs. B. They are getting married, and I agree to take pictures at their wedding"

Then couldn't they be as backward and bigoted as they want by being a private club instead of a public business?

Why would Mr. A be marrying a Mrs. B? Does Mr. B know? Shouldn't it be Miss or Ms. B?

Or are we past gay marriage now and are moving on to the point where we are arguing on fark over whether the law discriminates against polygamists?

They are marrying each other simply because I hit the "r" key while typing.


Good jorb.  Your clumsy fingers are going to get B brought up on bigamy charges.  I hope you're happy with yourself.
 
2014-03-07 02:08:20 PM

mark12A: Stop demanding that I accept Gay Marriage. I don't, and I'm not a bigot.


Sorry, but you kind of are.  Replace "Gay Marriage" with "Interracial Marriage" and I think you might see the similarities.
 
2014-03-07 02:08:49 PM

mark12A: My opposition has more to do with maintaining the traditional functionality of marriage (producing and rearing quality replacement citizens)


My wife and I cannot have children.  Are you telling me we shouldn't be married?  No?  Then what's the difference?

 the specter of bearded men in wedding dresses...(ewww!)

So just because you're creeped out, others should suffer.  Got it.
 
2014-03-07 02:09:01 PM
They appear to want and expect all Americans to recognize and affirm that equal dignity, under penalty of ostracism from civilized life.
That is an unacceptable, illiberal demand.


I don't know ... that demand seems to have worked well against racist and anti-miscongeniationists.
 
2014-03-07 02:09:13 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: You might start hanging out with the person, talking about sports or electronics or cars, bringing him to group events to meet your other buddies, inviting him to poker night, having sex a few times, going ballgames together and whatnot, THEN finding out he's a homo. I know they didn't choose to be gay but not disclosing it upfront is horribly rude IMO.


Such a genuine smile this prompted... wonderful.
 
2014-03-07 02:10:09 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Pincy: what_now: They appear to want and expect all Americans to recognize and affirm that equal dignity, under penalty of ostracism from civilized life

Yes. That's exactly right.

You are free to be a bigot. Hate all you want. Join the Klan, fly the Confederate flag, tattoo a swastika to your forehead.

But other people will look down at you.

Came here to say this exact same thing.

Funny thing is, I actually prefer that people be more open about their bigotry.  It makes it a lot easier to avoid them.

Same with gay people. Some are rather obvious about it, and are therefore easy to avoid. Whereas others aren't noticeably gay and there is no way to immediately recognize that they are. Maybe they are single despite being reasonable looking and successful, maybe they dont like sports as much as regular guys do, maybe they don't ogle women or make off color comments, etc., so you can speculate that they are gay but you can't really tell.

I know this makes me sound bigoted to those here who are intolerant of those who aren't PC, but it is really aggravating when you meet a gay person who seems outwardly normal and doesn't make it apparent that he's gay.

You might start hanging out with the person, talking about sports or electronics or cars, bringing him to group events to meet your other buddies, inviting him to poker night, having sex a few times, going ballgames together and whatnot, THEN finding out he's a homo. I know they didn't choose to be gay but not disclosing it upfront is horribly rude IMO.


I'm assuming you are trying to make some kind of point but I'm not sure you made the point you intended to.  Being a bigot is a choice.  Being gay isn't.
 
2014-03-07 02:10:47 PM

mark12A: I just wish for a day when "religious conservatives PC Warriors" would just go about their business AND QUIT TELLING EVERYONE ELSE HOW TO LIVE.

See how that works?

Stop demanding that I accept Gay Marriage. I don't, and I'm not a bigot. I want gays to be left in peace and live their lives without harassment. My opposition has more to do with maintaining the traditional functionality of marriage (producing and rearing quality replacement citizens) and not the specter of bearded men in wedding dresses...(ewww!)


No one is demanding you ACCEPT gay marriage.  What they are demanding is that gays have every right TO MARRY, have all the benefits of that, and YOU can't tell them they can't.  Where is it written that YOU have to have anything to do with gays, and more importantly, WHERE IS MARRIAGE DEFINED AS ONLY BETWEEN ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN?  I have asked for YEARS where this is, and not once has it been pointed out to me. King Solomon, from that book you seem to beat people up with had what? 700 wives/whores? The "traditional functionality of marriage"?  Really?  I about spit water on that one.  There is no "traditional functionality" of marriage.   You're one of the ones that think marriage is for procreation only.  Fark you on behalf of every couple who cannot conceive, every child who dies in the womb, and just on general grounds that that is farked up thinking.

The "traditional" definition of marriage goes back at least as far as ancient Mesopotamia, and unlike your personal definition, marriage served to seal power deals and acquire lands.  Concubines and acceptable women were brought to the bed to serve as incubators for heirs, not the woman of the marriage.  Only much later did it become "the woman should submit, and bear heirs".  So fark off with the traditional thing.

So until laws are passed that allow bands of fabulous men to kick in your door, gay marry you by force and tell your wife that her entire wardrobe is HORRID, your thought process is weak and unsubstantiated, with absolutely no basis in fact.

So how about you go hide in your little closet so the homoghey doesn't accidentally fall all over you and make you an actual human being.
 
2014-03-07 02:11:52 PM

mark12A: Stop demanding that I accept Gay Marriage. I don't, and I'm not a bigot. I want gays to be left in peace and live their lives without harassment. My opposition has more to do with maintaining the traditional functionality of marriage (producing and rearing quality replacement citizens) and not the specter of bearded men in wedding dresses...(ewww!)


Very few people are trying to force you to accept gays or gay marriage, or for anyone to be forced to perform a marriage ceremony for a gay couple. And those few people are wrong to try to.
 
2014-03-07 02:12:04 PM

SkinnyHead: Should wedding photographers be forced to photograph gay weddings, despite religious objections?



1. Which religion forbids taking photographs (or making other images)of/or preparing food for homosexuals?

2. Are you aware that if you photograph a gay couple or serve them cupcakes, it doesn't make you homosexual?
 
2014-03-07 02:12:35 PM

mark12A: Stop demanding that I accept Gay Marriage. I don't, and I'm not a bigot. I want gays to be left in peace and live their lives without harassment. My opposition has more to do with maintaining the traditional functionality of marriage (producing and rearing quality replacement citizens) and not the specter of bearded men in wedding dresses...(ewww!)


Aside from arguments others have noted ((a) why aren't you also protesting infertile couples getting married; and (b) plenty of people have children without getting married), there's also the question of how restricting marriage to heterosexual couples will help achieve your purported goal of "producing and rearing quality replacement citizens." Do you believe that, if gay marriage is legal, heterosexual people will stop having children?

The only way this could be logically consistent is you believe that many current marriages include closeted homosexual people who are trapped in a loveless relationship and that if gay marriage were legal, they would choose to be with someone they loved. Accordingly, there would be fewer heterosexual marriages, because the ones based on lies would not exist.

Is that what you're saying? We need to keep marriage restricted to heterosexual couples, because it is more important to keep a high birthrate than that people should be with those they love?
And if so, where do you stop? If the birthrate slips, do you start having forced breeding camps? Do you start selecting people to bear children based on their genetic traits, rather than any actual interest in each other? And if people refuse, do you imprison and rape them?
 
2014-03-07 02:14:17 PM
Ladies and gentlemen!  I present to you ...

images.nationalgeographic.com

The greatest bigot of the 1950's and 60's!
 
2014-03-07 02:15:46 PM

palelizard: luniz5monody: Debeo Summa Credo: luniz5monody: What keeps the proverbial wedding photographer from:

Changing his business to a members only club by charging like $1/year membership fee. Setting up a meet and greet with the couple that is requesting services, and having them sign a contract that says "the 2 people I met with are Mr.A and Mrs. B. They are getting married, and I agree to take pictures at their wedding"

Then couldn't they be as backward and bigoted as they want by being a private club instead of a public business?

Why would Mr. A be marrying a Mrs. B? Does Mr. B know? Shouldn't it be Miss or Ms. B?

Or are we past gay marriage now and are moving on to the point where we are arguing on fark over whether the law discriminates against polygamists?

They are marrying each other simply because I hit the "r" key while typing.

Good jorb.  Your clumsy fingers are going to get B brought up on bigamy charges.  I hope you're happy with yourself.


This is a by-product of the massive amounts of Percocet I am taking due to breaking my ankle in infinity places 2 weeks ago in a snowshoe accident. I apologize to Ms. B and to you, good sir/madam.
 
2014-03-07 02:16:37 PM
Churches are allowed to discriminate.  Get yourself internet ordained, call yourself The Holy Church of Durable Images- voila you're as right as rain!
 
2014-03-07 02:17:57 PM

Karac: Ladies and gentlemen!  I present to you ...

[images.nationalgeographic.com image 470x300]

The greatest bigot of the 1950's and 60's!


If he was against gay marriage, then he was in fact a bigot. Greatest? I'd say probably not.
 
2014-03-07 02:18:49 PM
Marriage is gay.
 
2014-03-07 02:19:45 PM
In States where same sex marriage is allowed, you don't have to be gay to get same sex married, just like you don't have to be straight, or even really be romantically involved, to get opposite-sex married.

So even if two guys come and ask you to bake them a cake for their wedding, I don't know how you can definitively prove that they're gay.
 
Displayed 50 of 315 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report