Newt? Apparently he didn’t get better.
…and Newt, seeing what had happened to the other guys, offered a choice between death and longoongzo, and picked longoongzo, said, Hey, got some self-respect here, never had a Turkish enema, never gonna, I pick death! he said in defiance.
And Barney Franks says “Very well, then! Death! Death by longoongzo!”
Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn, and cauldron bubble.
Double, double toil and trouble
Something wicked this way comes
Eye of Newt, and toe of frog,
Wool of bat, and tongue of dog *…
- the one from a pit bull with lipstick.
Yeah, I hate it when people try to impose their views on you, by, like, telling you *you *can’t get married, because it’s against *their *morality. Fucking assholes!
Oh, I’m sorry; did I miss your point? Maybe you could point out to me where gays are trying to force heterosexuals to do anything they personally don’t want to do.
They’re forcing them to live in a world where (gasp) legal terminology has changed.
The problem is, you see, that humanity is very good at making a weapon out of anything and everything. Og finds rock, Og smash rock on next cave neighbour, Man splits the atom, Man splits the atom up other mans’ wazoo.
Religion is no different, there’s someone you hate and you grab what you have at hand to beat them up. And there’s probably nothings as piously satisfying for some people than bashing people over the head with the God Club chanting “god is peace, god is love!” all the way.
What gays are fascist now? I thought we were commie liberals! This changes everything!
What next? Jewish Nazis? Black white supremacists? Kittens having babies with puppies?
I find it never hurts to throw in a piece of ass.
That is really neat to know. That particular denomination is the one that the President-Elect belongs to. To the best of my knowledge, he left only the congregation and not the denomination as a whole.
Yes, no matter how old a person is and no matter the gender, it is still disturbing when even one person “gets in your face.” It’s even worse when it’s a lot of people at once. When they are angry and shouting, it becomes a mob.
The threat of physical assault is not the only way to be violently abusive to someone else. This time it’s not just several people. It’s a mob of millions. And they’re not in your face – They are in your butt when your butt is in your bedroom with the door closed and locked.
They are saying that the person you love most in the world will not be legally bound to you as if you were one person. You are being treated like a child again – as if you can’t know what is best for you.
The strange thing is that if gays and lesbians refused to marry, this same group of far right fundamentalists would probably be outraged by the gay’s determination to “live in sin.” Fundamentalists would then try to make them marry.
When Congressional Representatives and Senators talk about marriage being “sacred,” aren’t they bringing religion into the mix? And if it is “sacred,” how can they deny it to any citizen? What if marrying the same sex is a religious belief? It would be for me if I were in love with someone of the same sex.
How evil does a man have to be that he would greedily begin building his Presidential hopes on the bigotry of the lowest of losers – while he tramples over the rights of millions of Americans?
magellan0: As far as the video with the woman with the cross, I thought one of the most disturbing parts was not any one guy, but the mob getting in her face.
I have to agree that the video of the mob shouting in the lady’s face was disturbing. And from a strategic point of view, that stuff doesn’t help the gay rights movement. But morally, I don’t think that people who use the force of law to impose a set of behaviors mandated by their own personal religion on other people who don’t share that religion have the right to expect civility from the people whose rights they are restricting.
Of course there could be isolated incidents of scuffles. They get press coverage far more than their actual proportional occurence. The Orlando rally for instance didn’t get news, and …
get this …
there were people there warning that there would be people who would take anything, any coverage at all they could get to discredit the movement.
Thanks to my favorite namesake of the most famous 2nd grade citizenship award winner for not proving them wrong!
Will they? No.
Will some try? Hell to the yeah!
It will be a nice change from Christian fascists imposing their will on secular America. (Nothing personal, FT ;))
There’s somebutty for everybutty.
See the movie “Deliverance” for details.
I tend to disagree with that last bit. I certainly wouldn’t be surprised, and i’d understand that reaction, but I don’t think that means even uncivility for a good reason is still acceptable.
I’m with FriarTed on this (I don’t get to say that often ;)). Sure, there will unfortunetly be violent gay secular types with fascistic notions. But their ability to impose their will on the nation at large is close enough to zilch to not matter. I don’t buy the scalability argument; yes, if more widespread, there would be problems, but that’s true of everything. If there were more violent communists, you’d have a problem with them. But you don’t.
Quit being so damn reasonable, RT!
But seriously, if it is wrong to be uncivil to people who are unjustly restricting your rights, it is IMO purely for external reasons (e.g., such incivility tends to set back the cause of civil rights by creating more hostility in the oppressors toward the oppressed). But if I were (say) a black man living in the Jim Crow South, I really don’t see why a supporter of Jim Crow would have any right to demand or expect my civility toward him. Again, it might be wrong in the sense of counterproductive for me to be uncivil–John Lewis did 1000 times more for civil rights than Eldridge Cleaver–but this wrong is purely extrinsic, not intrinsic to the act, as it were.
Meh. I am looking forward to swearing loyalty to my bear overlords.
Unlike magellan, who is clearly pursuing a different romantic demographic.
Can you define a couple of things for me? “Incivility” and “acceptable.” What do you mean by them?
I dunno, but I bet they have the best uniforms. 
Yeah, but Ned Beatty? Sure, Jon Voight has creepy eyes and Burt Reynolds was probably all stretched out, but NED BEATTY?
What’s being missed here is that it does not follow from the actions of a few assholes that a larger movement of people is going to violently and fascistically try to impose its will on Christians.