# Al Franken can bite my ass. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 19, 2005, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556 "2005-05-19T11:23:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/141 "2005-05-22T05:04:00Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Cites? I have yet to see anything dishonest from Coulter. All of the following have been said either by or about Ann Coulter, but only one of them is true. Which one is it? A. The ‘religious right’ is a nonexistent creation of liberal paranoia. B. Liberals don’t believe there is such a thing as ‘fact’ or ‘truth’. C. There are no good Democrats. D. Her haircolor is natural. E. She has a rather large Adam’s Apple. > [@](#): > > Here’s just one example, where Franken attempted to hose O’Reilly: > [Me-Ri - ways to improve your health: Migravent, Nerve Renew & True Botanicals](http://www.frankenlies.com/glick.htm) Did you read that link at all? It’s not about Franken. It’s about an O’Reilly interview of Jeremy Glick, which Franken apparently makes a reference to in his book. What lie of Franken’s are you claiming can be found at that link? ---
**Author:** ![SolGrundy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbce88/32.png) [@SolGrundy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SolGrundy)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 8:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/142 "2005-05-22T08:42:23Z")
> [@catsix](#): > > What would be wrong with having all legal (as in the tax, courthouse, law-type stuff) marriages be termed civil unions, while not making any kind of pronouncements about the religious ceremony known as marriage? People who wished to get married according to their religious beliefs could have the type of religious ceremony they want, and sign whatever religious documents go into marriage (I have no idea, as an atheist), but the legal document would say ‘civil union’ for all of them? Simply because it doesn’t say “civil union” for all of them currently. The government acknowledges marriages of people from all faiths, or no faiths at all, as _marriages_. And people are now insisting that the government impose a separate distinction for same-sex couples. I couldn’t care less if the Catholic Church wants to consider my relationship as 5/8 of a marriage, because I have no allegiance to the Catholic Church. I do have allegiance to the American government, though, and I’m not going to stand for an official designation that my union is in any way less than a “real” heterosexual marriage. I said as much in my first post: I wasn’t cultivated in a petri dish somewhere, I’m not a recent immigrant from Homosexistan raised in some Godless alternate-reality commune, and I didn’t make the choice at some point to reject everything I was brought up to treasure in favor of my self-indulgent hedonistic gay lifestyle. I was raised\* Christian, and I still am a Christian, and my religion is every bit as valid as any Catholic’s. I was raised to believe that you meet someone, you fall in love, you get married, and you start a family, and that’s still my goal. I’ve seen my friends – Catholics, Protestants, atheists, Jews, Moslems – do this, and I want the same. And the only reason I semi-hijacked the thread was because the way it was worded in **Airman** ’s OP is just so fucking annoying to me. It makes it sound as if straight couples are going through all kinds of soul-searching to finally allow a concession to support equality for homosexuals. It’s not a concession, because it’s not equality. It’s the last stand for people to say that they do not and will not condone homosexuality, but they will “grant” equal financial and visitation benefits. They can’t stop the gays from fucking each other, but by God, they can make sure they know that we don’t approve. As you say, if civil unions for homosexual couples were introduced today, I _could_ get one, get a separate Christian ceremony acknowledging it as a religious marriage, and have what is on the surface is the exact same status my parents and all my straight married friends have. As for “what’s the difference?”, then I suggest you try introducing legislation that makes _all_ marriages in the United States, heterosexual and homosexual, “civil unions” in the eyes of the government. Just sit back and watch the opposition to that. I’m pretty damn _skeptical_ that you’d hear as many people saying, “What’s the big deal about terminology? It’s all the same thing! Quit your whining!” \*Note to grammar Nazis: I’m aware that “reared” is the proper word here, but I’m not going to use it in any discussion about homosexuality in the Pit. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/143 "2005-05-22T13:25:59Z")
> [@Metacom](#): > > Can we use a phrase other then “gay litmus test,” please? 😛 > > I envision some beurocrat walking up to a perspective adoptive parent and rubbing his forehead with a piece of paper. > > “Oh oh oh… Terribly sorry, sir. But the paper turned pink, which means you’re not allowed to adopt children. Is there anything else I can do for you today?” That’s actually sort of scary. I could easily envision a test in the future, combining genetics and responses to chemicals\*, that might determine orientation with %90 accuracy. I can just see the theocrats’ heads explode turning over the news: “Wow! A new test we can use to clamp down easier on them unnatural people” “But, it’s a choice!” “But, it will help national security! Think of the children!” “But, it’s a choice!” Who am I kidding? They’d implement that in a heartbeat especially for voluntary programs such as adoption and community service positions. Shit. \*Which is not to say gayness is all genetic, only that it’s possible that the brain chemistry between heteros and gays might be different enough to determine through a test, regardless of how that came about. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/144 "2005-05-22T14:49:58Z")
And every time they find a physiological difference, like in [this](http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7358) study, they’re a step closer to a “gay litmus test”. If people keep voting in the Religious Right party, wouldn’t surprise me a bit if someday they start testing for gayness for employment, just like they test for drugs. ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/145 "2005-05-22T15:59:05Z")
> [@](#): > > **SolGrundy** said: > As for “what’s the difference?”, then I suggest you try introducing legislation that makes all marriages in the United States, heterosexual and homosexual, “civil unions” in the eyes of the government. That’s exactly what I’ve suggested and what I push for. I also said that if the government refuses to do that, then it needs to extend the marriage contract to all consenting adults, whether gay or straight. So why are you jumping down my throat? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/146 "2005-05-22T17:30:57Z")
> [@catsix](#): > > That’s exactly what I’ve suggested and what I push for. I also said that if the government refuses to do that, then it needs to extend the marriage contract to all consenting adults, whether gay or straight. > > So why are you jumping down my throat? It’s great to find a subject on which we agree, **catsix**! This is the solution that I favor, too; and contrary to **sol’s** suggestion, I’ve not yet heard a conservative object to it more strongly than objecting to marriage-for-everyone. Perhaps there are such conservatives out there, but I’ve not encountered them. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/147 "2005-05-22T17:47:55Z")
It is indeed, **Dorkness**. I don’t know why **SolGrundy** seems to have the impression that I favor a ‘separate but equal’ approach. I thought about the civil unions for all thing because there doesn’t seem to be so much objection about calling all legal aspects of marriage ‘civil union’ as there does objection to making marriage fair to all. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/148 "2005-05-22T18:04:54Z")
> [@SolGrundy](#): > > As for “what’s the difference?”, then I suggest you try introducing legislation that makes all marriages in the United States, heterosexual and homosexual, “civil unions” in the eyes of the government. “Civil Union”, and “Civil marriage” sound almost like the same thing. However, people who want access to marriage are wise not to ask for “Civil Unisons”, since is likely to result in a waterd down version. Besides, why redefine “Civil Marriage” when it already means what you are asking for, Sol? catsix, the reason why people think you are asking for something “Seperate-but-equal” is because that is what you are doing, if you ask for “Civil Unions” (for gays) to be used a seperate context from “Civil marriage” (for hets) ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/149 "2005-05-22T18:30:42Z")
> [@catsix](#): > > That’s exactly what I’ve suggested and what I push for. I also said that if the government refuses to do that, then it needs to extend the marriage contract to all consenting adults, whether gay or straight. > > So why are you jumping down my throat? Homophobe: Gays are going to destroy marriage. Rational people: That’s insane. They don’t want to touch your marriage. A future newscaster (when the homophobes are scared that gay marriage has a chance, and thus start pushing for gay civil unions instead): Today, Congress announced a compromise has been passed. Instead of allowing gays to marry, we hereby declare all existing marriages to be civil unions instead, and mandate civil unions in place of marriages in the future. Homophobe: See? They destroyed marriage. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/150 "2005-05-22T18:33:55Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > “Civil Union”, and “Civil marriage” sound almost like the same thing. However, people who want access to marriage are wise not to ask for “Civil Unisons”, since is likely to result in a waterd down version. Besides, why redefine “Civil Marriage” when it already means what you are asking for, Sol? Scott, pardon me here, but you _still_ don’t seem to understand what we’re discussing here. Read the thread again and understand what it is the “get the government out of marriage” crowd actually wants. > [@Scott Plaid](#): > > catsix, the reason why people think you are asking for something “Seperate-but-equal” is because that is what you are doing, if you ask for “Civil Unions” (for gays) to be used a seperate context from “Civil marriage” (for hets) No, no she’s not. You need to go back and read the thread until you understand what’s being discussed. In short, **catsix** is promoting the idea (many of us agree with this thought) that the government stop granting marriages completely, and only grant civil unions. The word “marriage” would be undefined by any official group, leaving people to get “married” in churches or however they like, and indeed anyone who wished to could call themselves married. Meanwhile the government grants civil unions to straight or gay couples. Nothing “separate but equal” about it. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/151 "2005-05-22T19:03:13Z")
**Excalibre** , frankley, you confuse me. You seem to think I am misunderstanding the thread. In other threads, sometimes you hold people to standards of clear and simple comunication, and in others you yourself insult people, with out it having any real point. In fact, I have read each and every post, and think either you are confusssed when you say I am confussed, or I need to go back to a writting class. However, I can simply not see any way to convince you to see my point, so I am bowing out. Perhaps someone else can explain to you just how very little point, in terms or civil law, or in any other way, there is to redefinng marriage back into what it already is. ---
**Author:** ![SolGrundy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbce88/32.png) [@SolGrundy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SolGrundy)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2005, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/152 "2005-05-22T19:37:13Z")
> [@catsix](#): > > That’s exactly what I’ve suggested and what I push for. I also said that if the government refuses to do that, then it needs to extend the marriage contract to all consenting adults, whether gay or straight. > > So why are you jumping down my throat? Who’s jumping down your throat? You asked for more explanation of my stand on why I find civil unions unacceptable, and I explained it. If it turns out we’re saying the same thing, then so much the better. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2005, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/153 "2005-05-23T19:13:36Z")
On a related subject, I encountered a term today in a context that I really liked: civil marriage. If I ever become Lord High Dictator, I’ll replace all marriages with Civil Marriages, a contract that can be joined into by any two consenting adults that aren’t already in such a contract. And then I’ll release the flying monkeys. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/154 "2005-05-24T17:48:51Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > **Excalibre** , frankley, you confuse me. You seem to think I am misunderstanding the thread. In other threads, sometimes you hold people to standards of clear and simple comunication, and in others you yourself insult people, with out it having any real point. In fact, I have read each and every post, and think either you are confusssed when you say I am confussed, or I need to go back to a writting class. You know, I’m not usually one to harp on spelling or grammar mistakes, but when I see a violation of Gaudere’s Law as egregious as this one, I just can’t help myself. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/155 "2005-05-24T18:33:03Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > You know, I’m not usually one to harp on spelling or grammar mistakes, but when I see a violation of Gaudere’s Law as egregious as this one, I just can’t help myself. Gaudere’s Law, which states that any post made to point out a spelling or grammar error will invariably contain a spelling or grammatical error. In my post, I said that I have to go back to school, not him. I am admitting to being a bad speller. Nothing to do with Gaudere’s Law. Then you point that out, incorrectly. How briiliant of you. Now, [in another thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=6191259#post6191259), **pulykamell** says something quite relivant to this topic. > [@](#): > > I daresay the language proficiency on this board is better than that of 95% of the professors I’ve had in college. This is a fairly casual message board. Posters are writing without copy editors here. Have you ever read a writer’s copy before it gets published? Some of the best reporters and writers I know are almost clueless when it comes to the subtleties of punctuation, spelling, and style. > It makes me cringe when I see colons and semi-colons swapped. Or “lose” spelled as “loose.” That being said, [in still another thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=6191550#post6191550), **Excalibre** says that while he is strongley opposed to the religious right, > [@](#): > > I’m hardly given to kneejerk anti-religious sentiments. In fact, I spend a lot more time arguing with folks like \*\*Scott Plaid \*\* that religion is not something to be condemned. Well, as long as I am defending myself, I have to say that religion itself is quite deserving of “knee-jerk” negative reactions. This is due to its effect on the world. Just as people do not actual criticize Bush because they abstractley hate him, but because he has made some very stupid moves, and (almost) no one hates Lucas because of some irational hate, but beacause he can not leave good enough along, I point out flaws in religous belief because I believe it causes great har, Oh, and **Excalibre** , you might not think that way, but the very fact you disagree with the religious right, is enough to get you lumped in with me, in may circels, since you dare to think that a literal interpretation of the bible might not be the best thing since sliced bread. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/156 "2005-05-24T19:28:27Z")
“…causes great har…” Well, might not be a spelling error, might be a droll neologism. But “circel” is definitely _right out!_. And hereby do I refute Gaudere’s Law, because this post pointing out errors isn’t got any! ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/157 "2005-05-24T19:52:29Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > “…causes great har…” Well, might not be a spelling error, might be a droll neologism. But “circel” is definitely _right out!_. And hereby do I refute Gaudere’s Law, because this post pointing out errors isn’t got any! Bah! Qict braggyng! Yoo jest got luki it isn’t got any! ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/158 "2005-05-24T19:57:46Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > Gaudere’s Law, which states that any post made to point out a spelling or grammar error will invariably contain a spelling or grammatical error. In my post, I said that I have to go back to school, not him. I am admitting to being a bad speller. Nothing to do with Gaudere’s Law. Then you point that out, incorrectly. How briiliant of you. Ha! Fair point. I spent so much time making sure I didn’t have any grammar errors in my post, I totally missed whose reading comprehension you were criticizing. Win some, lose some, I guess. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/159 "2005-05-24T20:57:15Z")
That would be nice. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556/160 "2005-05-24T22:51:42Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Ha! Fair point. I spent so much time making sure I didn’t have any grammar errors in my post, Wouldn’t that be “grammatical errors?” (I am so going to hell) 😃 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/al-franken-can-bite-my-ass/304556.md?page=9)