This one time. This one time only. · 11:43pm Mar 26th, 2013
I will actually talk politics against my better judgement. (Which I usually keep sealed in a vacuum, frozen solid, encased in mithril and submerged in the deep recesses of my mind. Yes, that's the reason you don't see it often.)
To prevent you poor people from accidentally reading a politics rant, I've covered it with a spoiler tag. I do apologize but... ***Wanderer D clenches and un-clenches his claws***
Why. The hell. Is Gay Marriage an issue that needs to be sent to the Supreme Court? Of all the things. Of all the crap that needs to be dealt with. Gay marriage. That's so... late 90s.
And worse yet, people are arguing about the political effects and how it's unconstitutional to allow it. People. Please. I don't care. I really, honestly, don't give a damn about what you would like to happen. I won't even argue whether you're right or wrong.
But those guys acting against it, should at least have the decency to admit that it has nothing to with politics and all to do with your perception of how life on Earth should be due to their religious influences. Because that's where it comes from. It changes NOTHING in politics. It won't change the world. It won't make society collapse if you allow it. The Greeks had no issue with it and even today their culture is admired upon for it's contribution to mathematics, chemistry, technology... etc. Hell, the Romans didn't either until later on.
The truth, dear Mr. Cooper, is that it simply clashes with your religious morality, so don't turn it into something it isn't. For fuck's sake. Be a man and speak honestly.
I'm not blaming it on God. I'm not even saying that your religion is wrong, Mr. Cooper. I'm just asking you to own up to the real reasons behind your bigotry and stop hiding behind fancy words because, will all due respect. Jesus Christ Almighty, you piss me off!
Also:
PRO GUN PRO REPUBLICAN PRO LIFE
Gotta say, I completely agree. The fact that this is an issue just boggles my mind
Well said, D.
Aye, the mighty D has spoken. Hear ye and obey.
And I was under the impression that are politicians were wankers. Well, they are, but they are at least wankers for honest reasons.
Well. The British are just better. Unmistakable evidence, once and for all.
949476 And that's perfectly fine. But it has nothing to do with what I posted.
If I say my opinion, i'll just get flamed, so I'll just leave quietly.
SCREW QUIETLY! WE NEED A NEW PARTY IN AMERICA!
fc05.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/308/3/7/party_by_octanbearcat-d5jy5xc.png
I don't really care where they put their dick, so long as they don't put it in me.
There are two things you should never talk about on the internet.
1. Religion
2. Politics.
I'm going to sneak away before the fire starts....
You Wanderer D, deserve a medal. For I agree completely.
949476 Let's all agree you're a
majorgeneral faggot and move on with our lives.Pretty much where I am at.
949490
sorry thats just what i was able to get out of it
Politics time with a Latias. This aught to be interesting.
949503 Really? REALLY?
My god, it's like you fall further everyday.
It is odd.... It seems that the government sees the homosexuals as some sort of lesser people. They treat them as if they aren't human. Really, I could care less about all of the political gain crap; that is just politics. The real thing we should think about is the fact that we have to take a case that decides whether or not a people is recognized all the way to the Supreme Court. This shit should be common sense: they are people; let them do what they will with whom they love.
I ain't touching this with a 40-foot pole.
949497
This is why libertarianism is the way to go.
He's been tasked with giving the Supreme Court a reason that doesn't hinge on religion that adequately proves Gay Marriage is both unconstitutional and will negatively impact the USA.
I'm surprised anyone would ever try to prove anything that ridiculous, especially in this way, but we live in strange times.
949511
into what?
I question why the government has ANY say in marriage, gay or otherwise.
I have an iPad. I can't see shit.
I just don't get why this is a big fuckin' deal. If you love someone, marry them and fuck their brains out (not necessarily in that order). Who cares if it's two dudes or two gals? If a man can marry a motherfucking pillow, why can't I marry a dude if I feel like it?
949497
You forgot abortion.
949530 A giant pit of general ignorance and unbelievability.
Sorry if I seem rude or blunt, but Jesus man...
949500 Aww come one Regi, even he has feelings...
I mean, I don't disagree, but I do think you are exaggerating.
949542 Ok, I'll fix it.
I fail to see why this is a political issue. Its a religious issue, plain and simple.
949533
THANK YOU
Ahhh, the cries of bigots and overconfident wankers who really want to put a damper on people who don't swing for the other team. Mm, just ain't right.
I haven't got much to add here, I don't think, just... why gays? Why not terrorists? Why not world hunger? Why are we burning our time and effort on our fellow man's choice of partner than the problems that affect more than just your overly-holy religion?
Sad. To think, most of these people could be worth something to society if they devoted their time to something worthwhile.
949497
I disagree. Finding a willing and capable disputant is slightly easier online simply because of the bigger catchment area, so long as you pick your websites carefully. It's also possible to express your views with the safety and confidence of complete anonymity, and it's possible to conjure up the latest news and the most helpful information on religion and politics thanks to the world wide web, though again so long as you know where to go. More than once, I've had my views on those two topics changed by a good and healthy discussion with an anonymous user online.
The trouble is no different from any other - the more people you can find, the more likely it is you'll find utter idiots among them. The MLP:FiM fanbase is no different, either.
949515 I sure did...
images.wikia.com/fallout/images/e/e6/If_you_know_what_I_mean..png
949533
Benefits. They're the ones ensuring that your marriage is respected, with tax breaks and legal status across the country (and out of it, often). Additionally, whether or not you can be fired for being gay or straight or white or black or whatever.
So, they BELIEVE that gays shouldn't marry? They are presenting BELIEFS to the GOVERNMENT? Y'know, the two things that should NEVER mix? WHAT SENSE DOES THAT MAKE?
949503 Oky dokes. What I believe Mr D was pointing out is that his blog post was concerning gay marriage/rights, and the politicians allowing their objectivity to be obfuscated by their upbringing.
He, and I suspect most people commenting here, was then bemused, perplexed and bamboozled that you posted something that pertained to neither of these issues. Gun control and the abortion debate have nothing to do with the gay marriage debate. They are, as I believe some republicans like to say, NOMA.
So, my question to you is this: how did you leap from gay marriage to gun control and abortion, and how did you think either of them was a relevant topic for this blog?
949548
See, now that is a good way to put it. Anyone can call someone a faggot on the net, but big words make it look better!
I was gunna say you've gone soft... but naww.
949476 Cyber, please go hide in a little corner until either you die, or you come to your senses and stop making the rest of us Southerners look bad. Please, is that too much to ask? Ugh.
And I am trying to be nice, but lately... Ugh. Stupidity knows no bounds.
The problem with people being against gay marriage, is that they constantly use false arguments.
The most used and the weakest of all the arguments? "Because the bible says so."
Oh, then what does the bible say?
Here's what it says
Now, how does one "lie with a woman." Oh yes! One lies with a women for the sake of having children. Not only that, but women were seen as a property back in those times. A man was above the "property" title, and as such could not be owned. It was not allowed for one man to own another man.
The way I see it, the bible condemns homosexual intercourse, but not the relationship in itself.
To just beat the dead horse, the bible also condemns tattoos, it condemns walking in clothes that are made of more than one type of fabric, condemns sex outside of marriage and more.
Those who use the bible are the most pathetic of all. It's outdated and only used as a medium to spread christianity.
I'm a christian myself, and (I completely went off topic) even I think that how some people use the bible is pathetic. It's not some rule book, it's a storage of knowledge and tales if anything. A few guide lines at the most.
Sorry for the mostly useless rant!
949557
There is no such thing as complete anonymity. If they want to find you, they will. Just saying. It's a common misconception. We are all traceable here. Some harder than others, depending on the methods we use to gain networking access. But it is possible. Other than that, I agree.
But that's all from me. I don't feel like being the part of this dispute. Not the same country and all.
I agree that it's not a political issue.
However there are plenty of non-religous homophobes.
From a biblical PoV, marriage is between a man and a women. The legal definition is so as well, if I remember correctly. As such, politicians, with there heads so far up there arse they see light, try to make it a political problem instead of just admitting their views are steeped in religion and biased as such.
Now, seeing as America was founded by Christians on Christian morals, it makes sense that people are fighting against gay marriage. Doesn't make it any less bone headed, but at least it makes some sense & is still annoying to see every time I turn on the TV.
949595 It's not useless if you earn someone's respect for having at least half of a brain unlike Cyber the derpsquirt down/up there.
949539
i thought it was a bottomless abyss
949599
Not entirely sure who you're referencing by "they", but I get your point.
I am a conservative person. (I try to say conservative more than Republican these days)
I don't believe the issue of gay marriage is something that the government (city, county, state, or federal) should have the power to dictate the legitimacy of the love of two consenting adults. I don't like how things like "The Sanctity of Marriage" are being given the light of day in an age where 50% of marriages end in divorce.
I don't care about gay marriage. What I mean by that is that I don't give a single fuck if two members of the same sex want to get married. It doesn't hurt me in any way.
I don't believe that a religious institutions should have to preform ceremonies that go against their doctrine, but that should be their right as a religious institution.
I voted for gay marriage in Maryland, and I was honestly glad that it passed. Not because I honestly support gay marriage in any way, but because I think in the end we're all just people. And when it comes right down to it I think that all the people lucky enough to be citizens of These United States of America should be allowed life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
/rant
949620
They = those who want to find you, whoever that might be, if they even exist. Nothing else. I don't delve into conspiracy theories. Might have been too general with that, though. Sorry.
Apologies if I insult anyone, but I really need to get this off my chest.
This whole thing?
It's bullshit. People want to control other people because of their own beliefs. Sometimes it doesn't even seem like that.
Sometimes it seems like people want to control other people out of the simple desire to control something. It's disgusting, and I'm sick of it. Gay marriage shouldn't be a political issue. It shouldn't even be an issue at all.
It's no more unnatural or evil that heterosexual marriage is, and I won't even bother arguing with anyone who says otherwise.
If you believe it's evil, fine. Believe that if you must.
If you want to prevent other people from marrying due to the gender of their mate because of your own mentality, forgive me, but your head is stuck so far into your ass that you would need an demolitionist team to get it out.
949570
Well, no. In the Supreme Court, you're supposed to present precedents and arguments based on those precedents. You have to have a factual basis for your assertion or you aren't going to get anywhere.
But, you can 'make' something a fact if you just repeat it long enough, or use the absence of a scenario to prove the scenario wouldn't work. Either of those things are defeated easily with questions, but it's not that simple when they come up in legal proceedings.
949595
You. You are amazing. Such a brilliant post.