We will be able to look back on this and laugh, hopefully. I have confidence that the legal system will be able to pull its head out of the right wing's ass long enough to see that religious phobias have no place in politics.
The first time I read your comment, I simply nodded, and racked my brains to think of a response a little deeper than "THIS", heh.
Then I looked at it a while later when I was considerably more tired (toooootally crashing right now), and my mind is, suddenly, zeroing in on a particular part of the comment and now... totally blown by the idea of a wing having an ass.
This is one of those things where I just have nothing but loathing for the other side of the issue. Because no matter how many times they try to rationalize it, it all comes back to "God says it's an abomination."
If letting gays marry is somehow a "threat" to your marriage, then there is a fundamental problem with your marriage. And if you want to "protect marriage", why aren't you out protesting against divorce?
THIS, though man, I laughed so hard at that last line of yours. Not because I haven't heard it before but because of what I've been reading lately. Have you ever seen this series of comics on Sore Thumbs? (I'd link you just to the one you reminded me of, but they're funnier - and though I'm leaving a few out they still make more sense - in sequence):
Per the "Massachusetts" argument -- there is this small matter of "full faith and credit". Yes, the other states are obligated to accept marriages legally performed in Massachusetts, but that doesn't mean that they have to perform 'em themselves. They don't even have to examine the issue if they don't want.
Maybe -- maybe, and this is speaking in full devil's advocate mode, there are some compelling arguments against gay marriage. (Note that I personally know of none, nor can I imagine how one would logically arrive at any.) "Mr. Wingnut" also presents none
( ... )
Per the "Massachusetts" argument -- there is this small matter of "full faith and credit". Yes, the other states are obligated to accept marriages legally performed in Massachusetts, but that doesn't mean that they have to perform 'em themselves. They don't even have to examine the issue if they don't want.
THIS. I am actually surprised at myself for forgetting the whole Full Faith and Credit issue, which at one point was my favorite argument against the validity of Florida's Prop 2 (which prohibits the recognition of gay marriage or the "substantial equivalent"). Thank you for pointing it out though. :) Always good to bring up in gay marriage debates.
...what on earth are you responding to? Have you got like, the wrong LJ or something?
There was not a SINGLE mention of "nurses" in this entire entry. Neither I nor anyone else on the entry brought up "nurses" either. And... honestly, I very rarely TALK about nurses, and if I were talking about nurses in general, I certainly wouldn't be negative about it, since I have family who are nurses and...
I cannot BELIEVE that you are playing dumb here. I know I was commenting on this post, but I was referencing what you wrote elsewhere. I don't think you understand how hard nurses work and how important they are to maintaining our health. You were out of line, and I just can't stand the fact that instead of owning up to it, you just act like you don't know what I'm talking about.
You expect ME, who is by the way ADHD and therefore has shitty memory to begin with, to remember something posted... at an indeterminate time that almost certainly wasn't within the last month... in an unknown place... in response to who knows what? Going solely on a vague description like "that comment about nurses was rude!" ? And you "believe" that, not knowing when, where, or in response to what this comment was posted... nor having a link to it... nor having a quote of it... that it is in fact completely impossible for me to not "know what you are talking about", especially when you posted it to a completely unrelated entry that was posted in LATE APRIL? When it's now late August? And you assume I'm "playing dumb" and "pretending" to be CONFUSED
( ... )
Glad to see a fellow Twat over here! :) And thank you.
And re: the anon yeaaaaah that would be my reaction. :P At this point, since I already asked them once by implication and once outright to point me to the original (alleged) post that they're referring to, and they only responded with another diatribe (...accusing me of a diatribe. For pointing out the flaws in their reasoning, while admitting I could have said something without remembering it and requesting a quote so I could figure out what was going on. LOLWUT? Really now)...
Honestly, I'm just gonna assume it is one or more trolls at this point and just ignore it. I'm debating whether to delete or leave it up though... 'cause on the one hand it's not like it contributes to the discussion, but on the other hand, it's not like anon is actually shaming anyone but themselves with their silly, irrational behavior. :P I guess I'll decide later.
Comments 14
Reply
The first time I read your comment, I simply nodded, and racked my brains to think of a response a little deeper than "THIS", heh.
Then I looked at it a while later when I was considerably more tired (toooootally crashing right now), and my mind is, suddenly, zeroing in on a particular part of the comment and now... totally blown by the idea of a wing having an ass.
I might need to go to bed soon, ha.
Reply
If letting gays marry is somehow a "threat" to your marriage, then there is a fundamental problem with your marriage. And if you want to "protect marriage", why aren't you out protesting against divorce?
Reply
first
second
third
fourth
fifth
sixth
seventh
coup de grace
Reply
Reply
I too am still at work, but you totally just made my day. XD
Reply
Per the "Massachusetts" argument -- there is this small matter of "full faith and credit". Yes, the other states are obligated to accept marriages legally performed in Massachusetts, but that doesn't mean that they have to perform 'em themselves. They don't even have to examine the issue if they don't want.
Maybe -- maybe, and this is speaking in full devil's advocate mode, there are some compelling arguments against gay marriage. (Note that I personally know of none, nor can I imagine how one would logically arrive at any.) "Mr. Wingnut" also presents none ( ... )
Reply
THIS. I am actually surprised at myself for forgetting the whole Full Faith and Credit issue, which at one point was my favorite argument against the validity of Florida's Prop 2 (which prohibits the recognition of gay marriage or the "substantial equivalent"). Thank you for pointing it out though. :) Always good to bring up in gay marriage debates.
Reply
Reply
There was not a SINGLE mention of "nurses" in this entire entry. Neither I nor anyone else on the entry brought up "nurses" either. And... honestly, I very rarely TALK about nurses, and if I were talking about nurses in general, I certainly wouldn't be negative about it, since I have family who are nurses and...
...and I am REALLY confused. o.O
Reply
Reply
You expect ME, who is by the way ADHD and therefore has shitty memory to begin with, to remember something posted... at an indeterminate time that almost certainly wasn't within the last month... in an unknown place... in response to who knows what? Going solely on a vague description like "that comment about nurses was rude!" ? And you "believe" that, not knowing when, where, or in response to what this comment was posted... nor having a link to it... nor having a quote of it... that it is in fact completely impossible for me to not "know what you are talking about", especially when you posted it to a completely unrelated entry that was posted in LATE APRIL? When it's now late August? And you assume I'm "playing dumb" and "pretending" to be CONFUSED ( ... )
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
And re: the anon yeaaaaah that would be my reaction. :P At this point, since I already asked them once by implication and once outright to point me to the original (alleged) post that they're referring to, and they only responded with another diatribe (...accusing me of a diatribe. For pointing out the flaws in their reasoning, while admitting I could have said something without remembering it and requesting a quote so I could figure out what was going on. LOLWUT? Really now)...
Honestly, I'm just gonna assume it is one or more trolls at this point and just ignore it. I'm debating whether to delete or leave it up though... 'cause on the one hand it's not like it contributes to the discussion, but on the other hand, it's not like anon is actually shaming anyone but themselves with their silly, irrational behavior. :P I guess I'll decide later.
Thanks for responding to my post though <3
Reply
Leave a comment