With Proposition 8 overturned, the New York Landmark Committee ruling that the Park51 community center can proceed, and now the confirmation of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court in a 63 to 37 vote, it’s been a hell of a rotten week for Wingnutville.
Must be a little confusing, trying to decide who to hate the most.
1 |
Kragar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:27:22pm |
And let me lead off the official mocking and derisions by saying,
BWAHAHAHA!
| 2 |
reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:28:32pm |
I’ve always considered wingnuts useful when a wrench or
pliers is not at hand…..
This IS a bit much!
| 5 |
ihateronpaul Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:28:50pm |
I am so happy about the Prop 8 decision. Maybe the country isn’t going to implode into a terrifying tea party dystopia after all…
/hopes
| 6 |
Cineaste Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:28:57pm |
*chuckle*
They are now learning what it means to be a minority. How ironic…
| 7 |
darthstar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:29:22pm |
MADD doesn’t “hate” drunk driving. They campaign to prevent it because it’s dangerous. That doesn’t make them a hate group any more than a bridge club is a hate group against Bingo.
| 8 |
reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:30:07pm |
re: #7 darthstar
Wrong…
Bridge Clubs HATE swimming!!
| 9 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:30:15pm |
World Net Daily, ladies and gentlemen….
Hatred for unnatural and perverse sexualities. What if the average shortening of one’s life due to homosexual behavior was four times greater than that due to obesity and poor diet, or three times greater than that due to heavy smoking? Would that be grounds to attach the “perverse” or “unnatural” label to some sort of consensual adult sexual activity? Further, what if the pathological demographic indices – violent crime, suicide, depression, pedophilia – further correlated with increased acceptance of homosexuality? Would it be love toward the individual considering such a lifestyle, or would it be hate? Wouldn’t it be necessary to hate sexual perversity in order to truly love people considering it?
Wow. Just, wow.
| 10 |
CuriousLurker Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:31:49pm |
How about a hate group to hate haters. Oh, wait. That won’t work ‘cause then we’ll have to hate ourselves for hating the haters….
| 11 |
Kragar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:32:37pm |
re: #9 Slumbering Behemoth
World Net Daily, ladies and gentlemen…
Wow. Just, wow.
What if you think its perverse and unnatural to treat human sexuality like a dirty evil thing which must be hidden and purged thru antiquated religious dogma?
| 12 |
Jack Burton Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:32:39pm |
re: #9 Slumbering Behemoth
World Net Daily, ladies and gentlemen…
Wow. Just, wow.
Notice how the first 2 things on the list are ok, then it starts to get progressively worse until that one where the hatred and vileness get turned up to 11.
| 13 |
Cineaste Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:33:08pm |
re: #7 darthstar
MADD doesn’t “hate” drunk driving. They campaign to prevent it because it’s dangerous. That doesn’t make them a hate group any more than a bridge club is a hate group against Bingo.
Or, if we buy the premise, it’s hatred of an act. Not a person or class of people. It’s akin to the NRA saying not to hate guns, hate the terrible things that are done with guns. That article went on to list groups of people that should be hated…
| 14 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:33:51pm |
This is the perfect thread of an Irresponsible Hate Anthem…
| 15 |
wrenchwench Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:33:53pm |
Hatred for unnatural and perverse sexualities.[…]
Hatred for economic policies like fiat currency
Any list that contains both of those items HAS to come from a wingnut.
| 16 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:34:00pm |
God, that’s Clayton Bigsby’s line, innit? “If you have hate in your heart, embrace it!”
I like this:
What if the average shortening of one’s life due to homosexual behavior was four times greater than that due to obesity and poor diet, or three times greater than that due to heavy smoking? Would that be grounds to attach the “perverse” or “unnatural” label to some sort of consensual adult sexual activity? Further, what if the pathological demographic indices – violent crime, suicide, depression, pedophilia – further correlated with increased acceptance of homosexuality? Would it be love toward the individual considering such a lifestyle, or would it be hate? Wouldn’t it be necessary to hate sexual perversity in order to truly love people considering it?
Indeed, what if?
What if monkeys flew out of the ass of people like you?
| 17 |
darthstar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:34:13pm |
re: #13 Cineaste
Or, if we buy the premise, it’s hatred of an act. Not a person or class of people. It’s akin to the NRA saying not to hate guns, hate the terrible things that are done with guns. That article went on to list groups of people that should be hated…
That article went on to make me throw up in my mouth a little.
| 18 |
Cineaste Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:35:09pm |
re: #9 Slumbering Behemoth
World Net Daily, ladies and gentlemen…
Further, what if the pathological demographic indices – violent crime, suicide, depression, pedophilia – further correlated with increased acceptance of homosexuality?
Wow. Just, wow.
What if it turned out that states that permitted gay marriage had the lowest divorce rates and states with the highest church attendance had the highest divorce rates?
Oh right, wingnuts don’t want to hear facts that dont’ support their views….
| 19 |
Obdicut Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:35:21pm |
re: #9 Slumbering Behemoth
World Net Daily, ladies and gentlemen…
Wow. Just, wow.
They must really hate those guys on The Deadliest Catch, who live such risky lives. Oh, and they must really hate cops and firemen, too.
What terrible damn logic.
| 20 |
jaunte Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:35:28pm |
re: #9 Slumbering Behemoth
And this ridiculous strawman:
Hatred for the deflating of economic dreams caused by a political cultural [sic] convincing the poor that – given faux-racism and faux-social injustice – crime or public dependency (i.e., state-sanction [sic] theft) are a more realistic career choices [sic]than setting sail in the free market as a creator of goods or services that benefit others.
Garbage thinking, garbage writing.
| 21 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:35:57pm |
re: #11 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
What if you think its perverse and unnatural to treat human sexuality like a dirty evil thing which must be hidden and purged thru antiquated religious dogma?
Then we’re thinking on the same wave length.
| 22 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:36:10pm |
re: #7 darthstar
MADD doesn’t “hate” drunk driving. They campaign to prevent it because it’s dangerous. That doesn’t make them a hate group any more than a bridge club is a hate group against Bingo.
This is just dumbass word play. “It’s not OK to hate? So, like, everything is OK, right? Because if it’s not OK, you hate it!!”
In other news, “If you love pizza so much, why don’t you marry it? Huh?”
| 23 |
Targetpractice Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:36:31pm |
re: #19 Obdicut
They must really hate those guys on The Deadliest Catch, who live such risky lives. Oh, and they must really hate cops and firemen, too.
What terrible damn logic.
“WND” and “logic” are about as far apart as “Breitbart” and “decency.”
| 25 |
darthstar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:37:21pm |
re: #18 Cineaste
What if it turned out that states that permitted gay marriage had the lowest divorce rates and states with the highest church attendance had the highest divorce rates?
Oh right, wingnuts don’t want to hear facts that dont’ support their views…
What if Mexico’s Supreme Court also upheld the rights of Gays to marry in the same week as Prop 8’s getting overturned? Oh, wait…that actually just happened!
Darn Catholic countries…
| 26 |
Cineaste Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:37:24pm |
re: #18 Cineaste
What if it turned out that states that permitted gay marriage had the lowest divorce rates and states with the highest church attendance had the highest divorce rates?
Oh right, wingnuts don’t want to hear facts that dont’ support their views…
And, for the record, it turns out that that is true.
| 27 |
DaddyG Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:37:25pm |
re: #5 ihateronpaul
I am so happy about the Prop 8 decision. Maybe the country isn’t going to implode into a terrifying tea party dystopia after all…
/hopes
Trust the system. The founding fathers knew how to prevent tyranny. Starting with the assumption that no one person or ideology was virtuous enough to govern the rest.
After you establish the freedom thing the rest kind of falls into line.
| 28 |
reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:37:33pm |
re: #24 brookly red
Beer is better for you than soda!!
Works for me……
| 30 |
DaddyG Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:38:36pm |
re: #11 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
What if you think its perverse and unnatural to treat human sexuality like a dirty evil thing which must be hidden and purged thru antiquated religious dogma?
Then you just have to keep practicing until you get it right.
| 31 |
Kragar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:38:51pm |
re: #25 darthstar
What if Mexico’s Supreme Court also upheld the rights of Gays to marry in the same week as Prop 8’s getting overturned? Oh, wait…that actually just happened!
Darn Catholic countries…
Its that damn professional escort service of Babylonian descent, dontcha know?
| 32 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:38:52pm |
re: #28 reloadingisnotahobby
Beer is better for you than soda!!
Works for me…
But soda is preferable before operating heavy machinery. It’s all relative…
Wait, I think this is where we came in. I’m a goddamn multiculturalist!!
Oh, well, it’s all good…
| 33 |
brookly red Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:38:58pm |
re: #22 SanFranciscoZionist
This is just dumbass word play. “It’s not OK to hate? So, like, everything is OK, right? Because if it’s not OK, you hate it!!”
In other news, “If you love pizza so much, why don’t you marry it? Huh?”
that would make my beer very jealous…
| 34 |
Ojoe Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:38:58pm |
re: #28 reloadingisnotahobby
Try a vanalla ice cream float in Guiness.
| 35 |
DaddyG Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:39:16pm |
re: #28 reloadingisnotahobby
Beer is better for you than soda!!
Works for me…
Yet I never binged on soda and woke up in bed with a really ugly troll slobbering in my ear.
| 37 |
wee fury Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:39:37pm |
An oldie on the John Birch Society
for World Net Daily| 38 |
Cato the Elder Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:39:59pm |
Did anyone on the right try to confer with the Sacred Ghost of Saint Ronnie before they went all crazy-like?
No?
Didn’t think so.
| 39 |
DaddyG Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:40:06pm |
re: #22 SanFranciscoZionist
This is just dumbass word play. “It’s not OK to hate? So, like, everything is OK, right? Because if it’s not OK, you hate it!!”
In other news, “If you love pizza so much, why don’t you marry it? Huh?”
Hot cheese burns my tender parts.
(This thread is a smartass dream- keep setting me up folks!)
| 41 |
Charles Johnson Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:41:02pm |
Hah!
Breitbart has now pulled all of Kevin Pezzi’s articles.
| 42 |
DaddyG Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:41:14pm |
| 43 |
Ojoe Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:41:35pm |
re: #40 reloadingisnotahobby
It was a dare, it wasn’t too bad really.
| 44 |
darthstar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:41:54pm |
re: #41 Charles
Hah!
Breitbart has now pulled all of Kevin Pezzi’s articles.
Breitbart needs to hook up with Sharron Angle. I think they’d be perfect for each other.
| 45 |
ihateronpaul Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:41:57pm |
re: #9 Slumbering Behemoth
World Net Daily, ladies and gentlemen…
Wow. Just, wow.
World Net Daily is fucking the worst of the worst. Seriously. It’s ideological filth.
Here is my guide to writing a WND article:
Choose one or more of the following ideas….
Barack “Obama” wasn’t born in America. We know this cause he’s a nig-erian or whatever random country we feel suits our crazy theories today.
Michelle Bachmann is so smart!
We love Pat Buchanan’s racism so much that we ignore the fact that he hates Israel!
All muslims are subhuman filth!
Torture is FUCKING AWESOME!
The government wants to take your guns! (insert ad for “survivalist seeds” here)
Freedom of speech for Talk Radio, making Pornography illegal!
Health care is really a secret government plot to kill all the old people!
Homosexuals are just as bad as pedophiles! OMG SODOMY
and so on and so forth. no hyperbole was used, trust me.
| 46 |
Kragar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:41:59pm |
re: #30 DaddyG
Then you just have to keep practicing until you get it right.
I do, its just they seem compelled to play soley one on one, while some of prefer mixed doubles or the pocket edition if no one else is available.
| 47 |
wrenchwench Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:42:15pm |
re: #41 Charles
Hah!
Breitbart has now pulled all of Kevin Pezzi’s articles.
I’ll bet Pezzi has a large severance package.
| 48 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:42:16pm |
| 49 |
Ojoe Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:42:36pm |
re: #41 Charles
Next he will try drinking dill pickle juice through a chocolate flavor straw
(my cousins used to do that)
| 50 |
darthstar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:42:50pm |
| 51 |
Lidane Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:43:12pm |
re: #44 darthstar
Breitbart needs to hook up with Sharron Angle. I think they’d be perfect for each other.
Only if they both use birth control. Or chastity belts.
| 52 |
Kragar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:43:41pm |
| 53 |
Targetpractice Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:43:42pm |
re: #41 Charles
Hah!
Breitbart has now pulled all of Kevin Pezzi’s articles.
Can’t wait to see how he tops this level of stupidity. Perhaps next he’ll declare he’s running for public office.
| 54 |
Gus Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:43:58pm |
re: #41 Charles
Hah!
Breitbart has now pulled all of Kevin Pezzi’s articles.
Here’s their “excuse”:
Earlier this week, we read an on-line column which provided one of the most thorough and well-researched examinations of the many controversies surrounding former USDA employee Shirley Sherrod. We asked the author of the column for permission to reprint his article. Since publishing the articles, we have been made aware of other writings from this author which do not reflect the principles and values of this site. Because of this, we have removed the articles from Big Government. While we stand by the information contained in the articles we published, we do not wish to see the underlying issue confused or diminished by other work the author has done. We regret the error.
| 55 |
Alexzander Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:45:43pm |
Combined with the summer heat, the confluence of all three events this week makes me quite nervous. Absolute peak craziness right now…
| 56 |
Targetpractice Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:45:48pm |
re: #54 Gus 802
Which is not much of an excuse when you consider who the management/leading columnists are.
| 57 |
DaddyG Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:46:14pm |
re: #54 Gus 802
So if the article in question wasn’t flawed what views do they not agree with? Penis enlargement?
| 58 |
Ojoe Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:46:16pm |
From the WND article:
But if it’s all good, there can be no evil. And if there cannot be evil, then there cannot be good.
Dualism! a bad road to go down.
| 60 |
Gus Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:46:51pm |
re: #57 DaddyG
So if the article in question wasn’t flawed what views do they not agree with? Penis enlargement?
Perhaps it was the fauxtography.
/
| 61 |
RadicalModerate Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:47:22pm |
re: #9 Slumbering Behemoth
As repugnant as that one is, I think this one is even worse:
Hatred for a political culture that betrays it’s beautiful genesis, from the “self-evident” idea that “all men are created equal” to a multiculturalism that turns a blind eye to honor killings, vigilante death for apostasy (“There is no indemnity for killing an apostate [neither is there]…any expiation, since it is killing someone who deserves to die”), sexual subjugation of non-Muslims and jihad as it celebrates Islam. This friendly neighborhood hate group teaches Muslims, the media and politicians about the enduring Quranic sanction of apartheid and genocide. This hate group goes out of its way to befriend Muslims and to tell them gently the truth about the Islamic belief system.
Hatred for the idea of “multiculturalism” (which was mentioned many times in this article), as well as building a strawman argument against an entire religion of over a billion followers based on the actions of an extremist minority.
Not to mention the opposition to a basic tenet of American Freedom, that being “all men are created equal”.
| 62 |
jaunte Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:48:59pm |
re: #52 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Gee, I wonder why?
Pezzi is a hilarious writer.
What most doctors learn about sex in medical school would barely fill a thimble. My medical school emphasized sex more than most others, but even though I graduated in the top 1% of my class, I didn’t know nearly enough about sex. As luck would have it, I took a medication that virtually destroyed my sex life. I sought help from various doctors and found their level of knowledge disappointingly amateurish. I firmly believe that anyone called a “doctor” should have doctor-level knowledge, so I sought to remedy this deficit in my training by reading extensively and conducting research. After many years of this, I knew things that you would give your right arm for.
[Link: www.huffingtonpost.com…]
| 64 |
Kragar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:50:15pm |
re: #62 jaunte
Perhaps he can get a gig at Cracked or SomethingAwful
| 65 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:50:58pm |
re: #48 Slumbering Behemoth
In honor of the recent Prop. 8 decision…
[Video]
It’s pretty funny.
Sadly, that pretty much sums it up.
And after losing on the grounds that they had nothing, they’ve now decided the judge is a gay activist, because damnit! The people voted for this!
| 66 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:53:29pm |
re: #51 Lidane
Only if they both use birth control. Or chastity belts.
I assume Ms. Angle is past that time of life, but I guess it’s better to be safe than sorry.
Some friends of my father’s from church got married in their early sixties, a second marriage for each. The Catholic Church, it turns out, does not care if you’ve been married before, and are sixty-two, you have to go to the premarital counseling meetings along with the twenty- and thirty-somethings.
They agreed, in these sessions, that their marriage would be ‘open to the possibility of conception’, because, as the gentleman partner put it, “Anything is possible. But if it happens, we’re going to call the Vatican first thing.”
| 67 |
Cato the Elder Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:55:35pm |
What the pitiful little shittard at WND means by “deflating of economic dreams”:
Shit, man, I’m too old and unimportant to fuck my way up the social ladder by marrying one of Sarah’s retarded daughters.
I has a sad for the little man.
| 68 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:56:31pm |
re: #65 SanFranciscoZionist
Yeah. The local news station was talking about it earlier today, and they did a “man on the street” thing where said “man” characterized the judge’s decision as an “attack on my freedom”.
This resulted in me yelling at my television for the first time in many years.
“SHUT THE FUCK UP”!
| 69 |
darthstar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:57:26pm |
re: #67 Cato the Elder
What the pitiful little shittard at WND means by “deflating of economic dreams”:
Shit, man, I’m too old and unimportant to fuck my way up the social ladder by marrying one of Sarah’s retarded daughters.
I has a sad for the little man.
Hey Bristol’s back on the market. It seems Levi remained fertile even when they weren’t together (though I think the ‘other woman’ he knocked up had a kid named Trigg, personally).
| 70 |
Kragar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:58:07pm |
re: #68 Slumbering Behemoth
Yeah. The local news station was talking about it earlier today, and they did a “man on the street” thing where said “man” characterized the judge’s decision as an “attack on my freedom”.
This resulted in me yelling at my television for the first time in many years.
“SHUT THE FUCK UP”!
Which freedom of his was under attack supposedly? Which of his rights was being taken away by the ruling?
| 71 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:58:15pm |
re: #68 Slumbering Behemoth
Yeah. The local news station was talking about it earlier today, and they did a “man on the street” thing where said “man” characterized the judge’s decision as an “attack on my freedom”.
This resulted in me yelling at my television for the first time in many years.
“SHUT THE FUCK UP”!
That’s the angle I simply don’t get. What freedom? How is my freedom impacted or not impacted in any way by other people having marriage rights?
| 72 |
Spare O'Lake Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:58:41pm |
re: #22 SanFranciscoZionist
This is just dumbass word play. “It’s not OK to hate? So, like, everything is OK, right? Because if it’s not OK, you hate it!!”
In other news, “If you love pizza so much, why don’t you marry it? Huh?”
Thank you Emily Latella.
| 73 |
HappyWarrior Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:58:58pm |
The criticisms of Obama’s administration get more absurd by the day. I mean really you’re going to tell us that Elena Kagan wants to implement Sharia Law. I swear that element of the right’s obession with the word “Sharia” reminds me of a kid hearing a word for the first time and repeating it ad naseum.
| 74 |
garhighway Thu, Aug 5, 2010 1:58:59pm |
On the topic of the Prop 8 case, I have to say that the opinion makes great reading. It seems clear that Boies and Olsen fundamentally outlawyered the proponents’ counsel. They left the court with a factual record that is just overwhelming.
And while I am not sure whether to give credit to the lawyers or the judge (or both), the structure of the opinion is very, very strong. The findings of fact and the discussions about the credibilty of the witnesses put the opinion on very strong ground, as those are areas traditionally committed to the discretion of the trial judge.
It’s a great read.
| 75 |
darthstar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:00:27pm |
re: #74 garhighway
On the topic of the Prop 8 case, I have to say that the opinion makes great reading. It seems clear that Boies and Olsen fundamentally outlawyered the proponents’ counsel. They left the court with a factual record that is just overwhelming.
And while I am not sure whether to give credit to the lawyers or the judge (or both), the structure of the opinion is very, very strong. The findings of fact and the discussions about the credibilty of the witnesses put the opinion on very strong ground, as those are areas traditionally committed to the discretion of the trial judge.
It’s a great read.
It’s the best opinion since the Norm Coleman smack-down of 2009, when Al Franken’s legal team slowly dissected Coleman’s team and barely left enough of them on the floor to be used as bait.
| 76 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:00:55pm |
re: #70 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Which freedom of his was under attack supposedly? Which of his rights was being taken away by the ruling?
re: #71 SanFranciscoZionist
That’s the angle I simply don’t get. What freedom? How is my freedom impacted or not impacted in any way by other people having marriage rights?
Obviously, his god given right to look down his nose at homosexuals and the freedom to treat them like second class citizens. Duh!
| 77 |
Kragar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:03:21pm |
And to those people who say the Feds shouldn’t get involved, that Prop 8 is them interfering with the States right, try actually reading the Constitution you say you respect so much.
“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
| 78 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:06:22pm |
re: #69 darthstar
Hey Bristol’s back on the market. It seems Levi remained fertile even when they weren’t together (though I think the ‘other woman’ he knocked up had a kid named Trigg, personally).
You’ve mentioned this.
I think it’s slightly more realistic, as conspiracy theories go, than the ‘Barack Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii’ theory, only because it would need fewer moving parts to make it true.
| 79 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:12:29pm |
re: #73 HappyWarrior
The criticisms of Obama’s administration get more absurd by the day. I mean really you’re going to tell us that Elena Kagan wants to implement Sharia Law. I swear that element of the right’s obession with the word “Sharia” reminds me of a kid hearing a word for the first time and repeating it ad naseum.
I once taught a Modern History class in which we spent far too much time on the Von Schlieffen Plan, simply because one of my better students enjoyed saying ‘von Schlieffen’.
As far as ‘sharia’ goes, it serves a number of purposes. It reinforces the idea that all of Islam is united by one plan for world conquest. If the Muslim at your local grocery store doesn’t seem to know about this, it’s because he doesn’t understand what kind of low-down crazy religion he belongs to. (Similar to paranoia about Jews—it’s all a big world-takeover plan, but it’s possible that low-ranking actual Jews may not know about it, and think it’s a real non-Satanic religion.)
It also reinforces the idea that you can’t trust Muslims just because they aren’t violent, or even renounce violence—that’s ‘taqqiyah’, or only a tactic, or it doesn’t matter, because the religion, the real religion has this goal of imposing sharia worldwide, and the Muslims all ‘know’ that they’ll have to go along with this, whether they really like it or not.
I’ve heard all of this right here on this radical tranzi prog website, you don’t even need to go hunting the Freepers.
This is trash.
| 80 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:13:10pm |
re: #76 Slumbering Behemoth
Obviously, his god given right to look down his nose at homosexuals and the freedom to treat them like second class citizens. Duh!
I believe his right to look down at his nose at anyone remains unaffected.
:)
| 81 |
HappyWarrior Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:18:40pm |
re: #79 SanFranciscoZionist
I once taught a Modern History class in which we spent far too much time on the Von Schlieffen Plan, simply because one of my better students enjoyed saying ‘von Schlieffen’.
As far as ‘sharia’ goes, it serves a number of purposes. It reinforces the idea that all of Islam is united by one plan for world conquest. If the Muslim at your local grocery store doesn’t seem to know about this, it’s because he doesn’t understand what kind of low-down crazy religion he belongs to. (Similar to paranoia about Jews—it’s all a big world-takeover plan, but it’s possible that low-ranking actual Jews may not know about it, and think it’s a real non-Satanic religion.)
It also reinforces the idea that you can’t trust Muslims just because they aren’t violent, or even renounce violence—that’s ‘taqqiyah’, or only a tactic, or it doesn’t matter, because the religion, the real religion has this goal of imposing sharia worldwide, and the Muslims all ‘know’ that they’ll have to go along with this, whether they really like it or not.
I’ve heard all of this right here on this radical tranzi prog website, you don’t even need to go hunting the Freepers.
This is trash.
Ya know, it is quite similiar to the paranoia I’ve seen about Jews throughout history and in to the present. Most of the people who talk about Islam in this way I imagine have never met Muslims. I probably know more than the average American due to the diversity of the area I grew up in.
| 82 |
im_gumby_damnit Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:23:25pm |
And here is my take on this news roundup:
1. Kagan Confirmation: She’s undoubtedly a strident liberal, but she seems like a nice, smart lady. Elections have consequences and this is one of them.
2. Park51 Center: Muslims own the land and have the right to build on it. Government shouldn’t block it simply because other followers of Islam attacked the nearby World Trade Center. Nonetheless, for a religion whose followers can be overly sensitive at times, they might have picked a less provocative location.
3. Gay Marriage Ruling: Have no problem with gay people. Gay marriage is not a hot button issue for me. I do want to make a few practical observations. First, this will make the religious right flock to the polls in November, so the timing of this is not good for Democrats. This is the last thing Obama wants to be talking about right now. Second, this is likely to get overturned. Maybe in the 9th Circuit, but almost definitely by this Supreme Court. Third, any bets on how long it takes for a Republican to call for an amendment to the Constitution to block gay marriage? Hell, they can just throw this in with that amendment Lindsay Graham proposed to keep illegal immigrants from obtaining citizenship for their children born in the U.S.
| 83 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:24:26pm |
re: #80 SanFranciscoZionist
I keep hearing from a certain family member “If we let them marry, what’s to stop people from marrying children”?
Oh, I dunno. I have a better question, if we let people get a pilot’s license, what’s to stop them from flying into the sun?
| 84 |
Kragar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:29:25pm |
re: #83 Slumbering Behemoth
I keep hearing from a certain family member “If we let them marry, what’s to stop people from marrying children”?
Oh, I dunno. I have a better question, if we let people get a pilot’s license, what’s to stop them from flying into the sun?
But if we let them marry, whats to stop people from sticking a fork in their eye?
Preventing responsible adults from exercising a right and privilege others enjoy does nothing to prevent morons from being morons and criminals from being criminals.
| 85 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:29:32pm |
re: #83 Slumbering Behemoth
I keep hearing from a certain family member “If we let them marry, what’s to stop people from marrying children”?
Informed consent, and legal minimum ages of marriage. Changing one law about marriage does not void all laws about marriage.
You know this, I know. I just get irritable.
| 86 |
Yashmak Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:29:42pm |
It’s a bit . . uh…difficult for the wingnuts to hate on the Prop 8 thing en-masse…even on sites that are normally incandescent with conservative fire like Michelle Malkin’s blog, too many commentors vocally disagree with Prop 8. And they don’t like noticing there are fractures in their conservative crowd…so instead they start cracking jokes.
Kagan? Hell, I bet half of the conservatives out there only dislike her because they heard conservatives dislike her. I haven’t really heard anything positive or negative enough to make me think one way or the other…and I expect that after her confirmation, we can look forward to a comfortably mediocre career from her.
That leaves the Mosque.
| 87 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:34:23pm |
re: #82 im_gumby_damnit
First, this will make the religious right flock to the polls in November, so the timing of this is not good for Democrats.
I am not entirely sure who this “religious right” is supposed to be here in California. The folks who came to the polls in ‘08 and passed Prop. 8 also gave the state to Obama.
| 88 |
im_gumby_damnit Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:34:41pm |
re: #83 Slumbering Behemoth
One interesting legal question arising from this ruling is whether Mormons who practice polygamy will assert a right to have multiple spouses. In my mind, that’s about as far as the old “slippery slope” argument might get you.
| 89 |
darthstar Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:36:02pm |
re: #78 SanFranciscoZionist
You’ve mentioned this.
I think it’s slightly more realistic, as conspiracy theories go, than the ‘Barack Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii’ theory, only because it would need fewer moving parts to make it true.
Yes, and it’s always fun to speculate. But are you really saying Sarah isn’t a moving part? :)
| 90 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:36:09pm |
re: #87 Slumbering Behemoth
I am not entirely sure who this “religious right” is supposed to be here in California. The folks who came to the polls in ‘08 and passed Prop. 8 also gave the state to Obama.
I think the idea here is that the whole issue being in the news will stir up the religious right, and they’ll turn out and vote for so-con candidates in response.
Hard to tell. The religious right has an internal clock about voting and not voting that I don’t fully understand.
| 91 |
im_gumby_damnit Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:36:59pm |
re: #87 Slumbering Behemoth
I’m not talking about California per se. Republicans will make this a national issue and beat the anti-gay drum.
| 92 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:37:37pm |
re: #88 im_gumby_damnit
One interesting legal question arising from this ruling is whether Mormons who practice polygamy will assert a right to have multiple spouses. In my mind, that’s about as far as the old “slippery slope” argument might get you.
And it’s a real question. As long as all other laws protecting the rights of women and children are being upheld, and answers to a few legal issues are ironed out, I haven’t come up with a real strong answer why plural marriage shouldn’t be legal.
I myself have a religious prohibition against it, but that’s specific to my community.
| 94 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:38:30pm |
re: #89 darthstar
Yes, and it’s always fun to speculate. But are you really saying Sarah isn’t a moving part? :)
Let’s just say that your version seems libelous to me, but it does not boggle the mind to think that it could have happened.
The other actually does boggle the mind, and makes no sense at all.
| 95 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:39:04pm |
re: #88 im_gumby_damnit
I doubt it. There is plenty of legal precedent for not allowing polygamy/polyandry to be legalized.
| 96 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:41:06pm |
re: #91 im_gumby_damnit
They can try, but I’m not sure it will work. The so-con leaning religious left will likely continue to vote democrat.
| 97 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:41:14pm |
re: #95 Slumbering Behemoth
I doubt it. There is plenty of legal precedent for not allowing polygamy/polyandry to be legalized.
Great-great (great?) grandpa of one of my college friends went to jail in Utah, back in the day, for having three wives.
They called it ‘doing time for your cohabs’.
Men of that generation were in a real bind. It would be interesting to see some fiction set around that period.
| 98 |
im_gumby_damnit Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:45:18pm |
re: #96 Slumbering Behemoth
You’re probably right, but I think this November is going to be as much about turnout as anything else. The right and far right are pretty fired up already and this ruling adds fuel to the fire.
| 99 |
steroid Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:45:31pm |
You know, I like to think that I can work against the people that you call wingnuts, but every time I see criticism of them, I can’t help feeling sympathy for them. It’s just like when President Bush won re-election, and the British newspaper asked how could so many Americans be so dumb. It’s the same thing with this sort of schadenfreude.
For me, I believe in tolerance even more for ideas, which are chosen, than for innate characteristics. It makes no sense to discriminate because of a person’s race or gender, but less than no sense to discriminate because of their ideas. If your method of living is based on, “White Christian Men are God’s chosen people and better than everyone else!” more power to you, and good luck. This is because to me, the chosen idea is the only sacred thing in this world.
Fortunately for my position, there are institutions in place that reflect this, including the voting booth. It is perfectly legal and in no way stoppable to vote for or against a candidate because of race, religion, or gender. And the people you taunt cannot be marginalized to nothingness. I would advise, if you really mean to advance your own ideas, to be more understanding of your opponents’.
| 100 |
Eclectic Infidel Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:47:58pm |
re: #88 im_gumby_damnit
One interesting legal question arising from this ruling is whether Mormons who practice polygamy will assert a right to have multiple spouses. In my mind, that’s about as far as the old “slippery slope” argument might get you.
I think they should be allowed to do so. I think polyamorous people should be allowed group marriage too. Of course, I don’t think the government should be telling consenting and sane adults who they can and cannot marry (notice I wrote “who” not “what”). That’s strictly my opinion.
| 101 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:50:37pm |
re: #98 im_gumby_damnit
Maybe. I consider myself to be “on the right”, and I have no problem what so ever with two consenting adults legally marrying regardless of their gender preference.
Also, I find it appalling that people on my side of the political spectrum consider it a “conservative value” to deny equal protection under the law to homosexuals who want to marry. I see nothing “conservative” about that position.
| 102 |
Obdicut Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:54:42pm |
re: #99 steroid
It makes no sense to discriminate because of a person’s race or gender, but less than no sense to discriminate because of their ideas. If your method of living is based on, “White Christian Men are God’s chosen people and better than everyone else!” more power to you, and good luck. This is because to me, the chosen idea is the only sacred thing in this world
That’s idiotic. Of course we should discriminate based on ideas. That’s the only thing to discriminate on. Why on earth would you want more power to a white supremacist?
Terrible logic.
| 103 |
im_gumby_damnit Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:55:54pm |
re: #101 Slumbering Behemoth
I consider myself to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal, so I’m with you.
I recall that gay marriage was adroitly used by the right as a wedge issue in 2004. Unfortunately, I’ll wager that we’re going to see it again heading into November. In fact, some Republican politician will probably be on Fox News tonight hammering this issue.
| 104 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 2:57:25pm |
re: #103 im_gumby_damnit
I consider myself to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal, so I’m with you.
I recall that gay marriage was adroitly used by the right as a wedge issue in 2004. Unfortunately, I’ll wager that we’re going to see it again heading into November. In fact, some Republican politician will probably be on Fox News tonight hammering this issue.
Probably. And while economics is going to be the key issue for the midterms, so-con pandering will probably help win some votes from people who can be convinced that somehow gay people are getting something they’re not.
But folks still gotta get married.
| 105 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:01:04pm |
re: #103 im_gumby_damnit
re: #104 SanFranciscoZionist
Lets not forget that there will be a whole new crop of young people coming to voting age, and they see the issue through a completely different lens than the older generations.
The ability of the so-con right to make gay rights a wedge issue is slowly fading into the sunset. The sooner it (and crap like it) goes, the better.
| 106 |
steroid Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:02:14pm |
re: #102 Obdicut
That’s idiotic. Of course we should discriminate based on ideas. That’s the only thing to discriminate on. Why on earth would you want more power to a white supremacist?
Terrible logic.
I disagree. An idea is chosen by the free will of its holder. Race, gender, and sexual orientation are mere facets of a blind reality. We should be trying to master reality and fulfill our ideas, not submit to reality and deny our ideas.
| 107 |
Obdicut Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:05:05pm |
re: #106 steroid
I disagree. An idea is chosen by the free will of its holder. Race, gender, and sexual orientation are mere facets of a blind reality. We should be trying to master reality and fulfill our ideas, not submit to reality and deny our ideas.
That’s meaningless babble, that endorses the ideas of the Nazis just because they are ideas.
Ideas are not all equal. That’s foolish moral relativity.
| 108 |
celticdragon Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:06:11pm |
Must be a little confusing, trying to decide who to hate the most.
That’s easy. Hate the Nazi, Marxist, shari’a luvin’, America destroyen’, butt secks kweers like any good Leviticus obedient American Christian is supposed to do…
After all, somebody has to stop the radical kweer agenda with their hard, muscled bodies touching in soft, filtered light…Firm yet tender caresses and the ecstatic tingle of …
///
Anybody else notice how utterly pornographic some of the anti gay types get when they describe how icky they imagine gay sex must be? Heh!
| 109 |
steroid Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:18:58pm |
re: #107 Obdicut
In what way is any idea, not actually implemented, superior to any other?
| 110 |
b_sharp Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:25:47pm |
re: #109 steroid
In what way is any idea, not actually implemented, superior to any other?
A meme, which is what you are talking about, can spread without action, simply through repetition. Replicated in enough minds and it will be acted on.
| 111 |
Obdicut Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:25:58pm |
re: #109 steroid
In what way is any idea, not actually implemented, superior to any other?
Well, the ideas that form, say, the theory of natural selection and sexual selection are superior to the ideas that form Lysenkoism, because they’re internally consistent, make sense, and are provable in the real world, whereas Lysenkoism ignores reality and is internally inconsistent.
To put it another way, the idea that all mathematical systems are either consistent or complete, but not both, is superior to the idea that all mathematical systems are consistent and complete, because the first is true and the second is false.
| 112 |
steroid Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:35:07pm |
But the value of a true idea versus a false idea comes only in the implementation. And even a false idea may lead to valuable outcomes when combined with other ideas. It may even do so more efficiently. If I have the idea that the answer to every math question is 42, the idea is false, but if I’m tested on the cube root of 74088, my idea has value. That’s something of an absurdity, but my point is that most ideas are not views of objective truth, but colored by other personal ideas and values, and that a self-consistent system of values is more impressive to me than a system consistent with mere reality.
| 113 |
Obdicut Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:42:06pm |
re: #112 steroid
But the value of a true idea versus a false idea comes only in the implementation.
That is wildly untrue, and nearly nonsensical.
If I have the idea that the answer to every math question is 42, the idea is false, but if I’m tested on the cube root of 74088, my idea has value.
No, it doesn’t. Your idea is that it is true for all questions, not just for that one. The idea remains just as wrong as ever.
a self-consistent system of values is more impressive to me than a system consistent with mere reality.
This is sophomoric bullshit on your part. Or just plain nuts.
| 114 |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:51:59pm |
re: #109 steroid
In what way is any idea, not actually implemented, superior to any other?
In what way is any idea, not actually implemented, worth anything at all?
| 115 |
steroid Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:54:22pm |
re: #114 SanFranciscoZionist
It is a reflection of the will of the holder of the idea, and that will is the sole definer of worth.
| 116 |
Obdicut Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:54:32pm |
re: #114 SanFranciscoZionist
What with his talk of ‘mere reality’, he’s either a bullshitter, a mystic, or just as sophomore.
| 117 |
Obdicut Thu, Aug 5, 2010 3:55:33pm |
re: #115 steroid
Oh, maybe just another person who’s read Nietzsche, and misunderstood him, and then fetishized that misunderstanding.
| 118 |
steroid Thu, Aug 5, 2010 4:03:52pm |
To answer your observations:
I assure you I am not, in the parlance of the vulgate, bullshitting. I am very much in earnest. You may stretch the definition of mysticism to comprise my view, but I still hold that ideas, while sacred, are the function of physically existing beings, so I don’t think that it would be accurate to do so. As to being sophomoric, I claim no more than that which I believe, and am prepared to defend it. What more need I accomplish to escape your charge?
And in point of fact I have read half of one work of Nietzsche, did not care for his writing style (though of course that may be the fault of the translator), and did not particularly implement his ideas into my own.
| 119 |
Yashmak Thu, Aug 5, 2010 4:53:41pm |
re: #104 SanFranciscoZionist
Probably. And while economics is going to be the key issue for the midterms, so-con pandering will probably help win some votes from people who can be convinced that somehow gay people are getting something they’re not.
I’m convinced that every vote that pick up with anti-gay pandering, they lose at least one by alienating another more tolerant voter.
Of course, it’s easy for me to believe that, as I’m one of the voters they have succeeded in alienating.
| 120 |
Yashmak Thu, Aug 5, 2010 4:57:03pm |
re: #109 steroid
I assure you I am not, in the parlance of the vulgate, bullshitting.
If I wasn’t convinced he was bullshitting before, I am now.
| 121 |
ClaudeMonet Thu, Aug 5, 2010 11:41:51pm |
re: #74 garhighway
On the topic of the Prop 8 case, I have to say that the opinion makes great reading. It seems clear that Boies and Olsen fundamentally outlawyered the proponents’ counsel. They left the court with a factual record that is just overwhelming.
And while I am not sure whether to give credit to the lawyers or the judge (or both), the structure of the opinion is very, very strong. The findings of fact and the discussions about the credibilty of the witnesses put the opinion on very strong ground, as those are areas traditionally committed to the discretion of the trial judge.
It’s a great read.
I love the fact that Olsen, the lead lawyer in President bush’s legal fight with What’s-His-Name (you know, the fat guy who used to be VP) is prominent in the anti-Prop 8 legal team. I’ll make sure to remind my gay friends about that when they start on their “Republicans are evil” spiel.
Alone in a Bathroom: The Fear and Uncertainty of a Post-Roe Medication Abortion Angel tucked two white pills into each side of her mouth, bracing herself as they began to dissolve. Her deepest fears and anxieties took over. Angel had wanted to talk to a doctor before she took the pills to ...
Cheechako
They Were Desperate to Get Pregnant. Then IVF Gave Them Extra Embryos. One morning last spring, Ashley Harrolle put her 1-year-old daughter down for a nap and went to the kitchen. She pulled up her fertility clinic’s contact information. It was time to make the call. In a freezer several hundred ... CheechakoJoe Bacon ✅
March FavoritesYou've seen these all already but looking back, just because. These are my favorite shots of this last month. That 1937 Zeiss Sonnar is such a gloriously wonderful bit of glass. Thanks for looking.
William Lewis
Russia’s New Combat Robots Blown Up by Drones Near Avdiivka When we landed on the moon, I thought about how science fiction had become real. Now, the robot wars have begun. It's more poignant somehow on the ground than in the missile wars we have in the air as ...
Rightwingconspirator
Why Did More Than 1,000 People Die After Police Subdued Them With Force That Isn’t Meant to Kill? An investigation led by The Associated Press has found that, over a decade, more than 1,000 people died after police subdued them through physical holds, stun guns, body blows and other force not intended to be lethal. More: Why ... CheechakoKGxvi
Abortions Outside Medical System Increased Sharply After Roe Fell, Study Finds The number of women using abortion pills to end their pregnancies on their own without the direct involvement of a U.S.-based medical provider rose sharply in the months after the Supreme Court eliminated a constitutional right to abortion, according ... Cheechako
Detroit Local Powers First EV Charging Road in North America The road, about a mile from Local 58's hall, uses rubber-coated copper inductive-charging coils buried under the asphalt that transfer power to a receiver pad attached to a car's underbelly, much like how a phone can be charged wirelessly. ...
Backwoods Sleuth
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ... Cheechako
