Originally Posted by PLOL
Give it up. An inflection point has been hit. The gays have won the cultural debate
Give it up. An inflection point has been hit. The gays have won the cultural debate
I rarely ever watch "reality" TV, but I watched part of the one season of the celebrity apprentice because Adam Carolla was on. Takei was also on there and he seemed like a bumbling idiot who still clings to his Star Trek fame. These ghost writers on his facebook have done a remarkable job of making him seem like a genius.
The only facebook page that I seem to have many friends share stuff from that I dislike more than Takei is the "I fucking love science" shit....where about half the shit they post on there has some sort of agenda and is factually untrue.
People love to repost the "I fucking love science" crap in order to show how smart they are for understanding/appreciating the posts there.
It's like a bunch of nerds trying to out-nerd one another in a public setting, and that sort of thing always got under my skin.
He admitted a few years ago on the Stern Show (or the wrap up show, more likely) that he had someone writing his shit for him on social media (though he may have used the word "helper" or some such euphemism), but that kind of got buried in all the other hilarious stories and moments they've had with George. His husband BRad is the guy who runs the social media shit, from what I remember, and because of his renewed popularity and unexpected social media success (mostly thanks to the stern show, which led to everything else) they decided they needed help keeping up, and keeping his new audience entertained and informed.
people are dumb
Again, this judgement was about redefining what marriage meant altogether. So you're argument of consent also comes into question if we are redefining the terms of the agreement. If they would have said something about civil union instead of marriage, then you can have a different definition. What they did is redefine the word marriage. Other than semantics I could give a fuck, but don't stop me from being funny. You know as well as I do someone will try to marry their schnauzer, it's just a matter of time.
Will be interesting when the states with common law marriage legalize gay marriage. I may have been legally married to my college roommate.
Incest has been around for millennia, and therefore it can't be next.Incest imo
Fucken fags, thats what I say.
Even tho legally, marriage concerns the actions of 2 consenting adults, people always jump in with "well now pedophiles..." or "Why not animals?" or idiot shit like that. Why do those things not apply here? Because one involves children and one animals. That's the premise we're working with. Kids can't consent legally, animals can't consent legally, dead bodies or furniture or whatever else can't give consent....
also, LOL at the whole changing the definition of marriage thing. When the US forefathers wrote that all men were created equal, well, they SURE AS FUCK didn't mean all men, but we've managed to change that over the past few hundred years as well to what the majority of people would now consider to be the correct meaning. Meanings of words change, things change, usage and beliefs change. That's how language works, that's how life works, and that's how laws work. Everything changes. Change is not bad, it is inevitable.
If people don't think you were a couple, and you never try to convince your community as such, you ain't married. You have to play the part, and people have to look at you two as a married couple for CLM to apply at all. I don't think many places do the common law thing much anymore anyway.
That's good. I have to admit I was a bit worried given all the quiet nights we spent eating fondue and watching One Tree Hill.If people don't think you were a couple, and you never try to convince your community as such, you ain't married. You have to play the part, and people have to look at you two as a married couple for CLM to apply at all. I don't think many places do the common law thing much anymore anyway.
I'm not quite understanding the logic behind this.Incest has been around for millennia, and therefore it can't be next.
And then the pendulum swings back the other way, usually very hard, by people who taut God and carry lots of ammo. At least, that's how history has gone so far. Lets hope we have a big war so we can forget about it!Even tho legally, marriage concerns the actions of 2 consenting adults, people always jump in with "well now pedophiles..." or "Why not animals?" or idiot shit like that. Why do those things not apply here? Because one involves children and one animals. That's the premise we're working with. Kids can't consent legally, animals can't consent legally, dead bodies or furniture or whatever else can't give consent....
also, LOL at the whole changing the definition of marriage thing. When the US forefathers wrote that all men were created equal, well, they SURE AS FUCK didn't mean all men, but we've managed to change that over the past few hundred years as well to what the majority of people would now consider to be the correct meaning. Meanings of words change, things change, usage and beliefs change. That's how language works, that's how life works, and that's how laws work. Everything changes. Change is not bad, it is inevitable.
Actually most recently he said on Howard that he writes it himself.
Last edited by Vwls; 06-26-2013 at 05:13 PM.
Yes, it was about time that they struck down the legislation that Bill Clinton signed into law, that homophobic hillbilly.
Nice tilt 4d, saying I'm trolling by agreeing with PLOL on a fairly obvious point he brought up.
keep doing the "but but but people will marry cats" routine. That certainly doesn't come off as grasping for straws lol
Does this mean that Antonio Esfandiari and Jeff Gross can get gay married now?
You know they want too.
Bros before Hos.
No, Hos before Bros.
Who's going to be the first professional poker player to get gay married?
Yeah, right. Everyone knows it would be a woman and her 82 cats.
So the two women at the center of the California Prop 8 lawsuit are getting married today:
That's Kristin Perry and Sandra Stier. One is 48, the other is 50.
The thing I wanted to bring up has nothing to do with their marriage, but everything to do with how it seems nearly every lesbian couple looks the same.
The always seem to consist of:
- One woman who is butch/masculine
- One woman who is feminine, and usually right around average looking. That is, she's not what most people would consider "hot", but also not at all ugly. Sometimes she's a little below average, sometimes a little above, but in general looks like a typical woman for whatever age she is.
There are, of course, exceptions, but this is generally what I see every time there's a serious lesbian couple in the news. I also notice this among lesbians that I've known personally.
And I'm actually talking about serious lesbians here who enter long-term relationships with other women -- not college bisexuals who "experiment" or whatever.
I don't notice the same thing with gay men. They seem to be all over the place regarding what they look like as couples.
I am just wondering why there seem to be so few feminine lesbians who want other feminine lesbians. I can totally understand that butch ones wanting the feminine ones (for obvious reasons), but if you're a feminine woman who isn't attracted to men, why go for a woman who looks like a man?
I think the interesting thing about this couple is the huge fail they pulled off after the ruling. They called up Obama to thank him. They do realize this was a judicial decision and not an executive decision? Obama had nothing to do with it.So the two women at the center of the California Prop 8 lawsuit are getting married today:
That's Kristin Perry and Sandra Stier. One is 48, the other is 50.
The thing I wanted to bring up has nothing to do with their marriage, but everything to do with how it seems nearly every lesbian couple looks the same.
The always seem to consist of:
- One woman who is butch/masculine
- One woman who is feminine, and usually right around average looking. That is, she's not what most people would consider "hot", but also not at all ugly. Sometimes she's a little below average, sometimes a little above, but in general looks like a typical woman for whatever age she is.
There are, of course, exceptions, but this is generally what I see every time there's a serious lesbian couple in the news. I also notice this among lesbians that I've known personally.
And I'm actually talking about serious lesbians here who enter long-term relationships with other women -- not college bisexuals who "experiment" or whatever.
I don't notice the same thing with gay men. They seem to be all over the place regarding what they look like as couples.
I am just wondering why there seem to be so few feminine lesbians who want other feminine lesbians. I can totally understand that butch ones wanting the feminine ones (for obvious reasons), but if you're a feminine woman who isn't attracted to men, why go for a woman who looks like a man?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
