News for nerds, stuff that matters
Sections
About
Services
Slashdot Log In
Captain Splendid (673276)
capsplendid@@@gmail...com
http://pudgelovesunderagehookers.com/
AOL IM: captainsplendid (Add Buddy, Send Message)
Yahoo! ID: captainsplendid (Add User, Send Message)
What rolls down stairs
Alone or in pairs
Rolls over your neighbor's dog? What's great for a snack
And fits on your back?
It's Log, Log, Log!
It's Log, Log,
It's big, it's heavy, it's wood.
It's Log, Log,
It's better than bad, it's good!
Everyone wants a Log!
You're gonna love it, Log!
Come on and get your Log!
Everyone needs a Log!
Journal of Captain Splendid (673276)
Fear & Loathing
LOS ANGELES -- A hotel owner's $125,000 donation to support a ballot initiative banning same-sex marriage in the state has become a flashpoint, with opponents calling for a boycott of two of his hotels and supporters highlighting the donation in a fund-raising letter.
The hotelier, Doug Manchester, donated the money to support the collection of signatures to qualify the initiative, which would amend the state's Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage, for the November ballot.
Ah, the good ol' boycott. Bill O'Reilly sends his app...wait, it's not?
Mr. Manchester said Wednesday: "This really is a free-speech, First Amendment issue. While I respect everyone's choice of partner, my Catholic faith and longtime affiliation with the Catholic Church leads me to believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman."
The hotel boycott has been framed by supporters of the ballot initiative as intimidation of those who express their political views.
On Tuesday, Brian S. Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage California, a group supporting Proposition 8, sent out an e-mail message warning of the boycott, calling it a "bullying" tactic.
Hmmm. You're right. I can't remember ever seeing a religious or conservative group call for a boycott.
But wait! There's more!
The "stunt they pulled against Doug Manchester ended up raising $100,000 for the amendment in 24 hours," he wrote in the message, "and prompted at least 2,000 new marriage supporters to join our ranks." He asked e-mail recipients to donate "$50, $100, or even $500 right now."
Yes! Escalation! Spend as much money as you can on hate! God forbid we should feed the homeless or anything!
Fucktards.
Not just fucktards. More blatant hypocrisy. (Score:2)
An outright lie. If you respect other people's choice, you don't try to make their choice illegal, and you don't try to hide behind a free speech argument.
What he really means: "I respect your right to choose - but only if you choose what
Agreed... but maybe, perhaps, look at it this way: (Score:2)
Lets say that he DOES respect your right to choose. (The argument that marriage has to occur between two individuals expected to produce viable offspring notwithstanding. And it would be a DAMN good argument if it would ever be used, instead of the "my preacher said I should think like this" crap.)
However, while HE may respect your right to choose, his masters do not. And his masters are the Church. Remember the Church is the first, and most original form of parasitical entity. While they don't torture
Re: (Score:2)
Because it's Friday night and I'm going to hit the hay ... :-)
3 words for those who want to be like Jesus - "He's dead, Jim."
Also the "2 individuals expected to produce viable offspring" bit - so why not allow polygamy, polyandry, swapping, orgies, prostitution, incest, and rape - they can all produce viable children? It's really a crap argument when you look at it. Besides, 2 lesbians c
Re: (Score:1)
Well, see? This is one reason men are so defensive about "traditional" marriage. They can lock the woman up in the house and rape them silly, very legal in many countries, and make sure the baby is his. This whole "working woman" thing kinda gets their goat, but since Reagan, they need the extra income, but you can be sure they would rather put the kids to work, instead of through school. "Liberal" America is really
Re: (Score:2)
Well, i did include polyandry. A lot of women want two husbands - one to pay the bills and one to do the dishes :-)
One of the problems nowadays is that in many relationships, the woman is making as much or more than the man, and also manages their education better (more women than men now graduate from university) and their money better (buying a plain-jane car instead of "ricing it up", etc).
Re: (Score:1)
I don't know. I just think that people who get worked up over the institution of marriage are just scared that something like this weakens their own relationships somehow. In truth, it only exposes their own insecurities and that their relationships were never very strong to begin with and can't hold up on their own. So they look to outside sources, like the church and the state, to prop it up for them.
Re: (Score:2)
Your thinking is accurate. People who are secure wrt their own situation don't feel threatened. It's the
Re: (Score:1)
As far as the church goes, it's just another assault on their authority. That's to be expected. All I can say to them is, "Tough titties, go away." We need to get these distractions off the ballots. Otherwise we'll never get decent, qualified people to even run. They just get drowned out in all the noise.
Not just hypocrites, but racist ones at that (Score:1)
The same arguments were used to promote miscegenation laws way back when.
Canada has had gay marriages, gays openly serving in the military (including with distinction in combat in the real war in Afghanistan), etc for about 20 years now, and nothing happened.
The sooner we get past this, the sooner they can overreact to real issues like taxation or the fact most "patriotic conservatives" are neither patriotic (serving in the military) or conservative (saving and investing, instead of over-consuming leeches a
Re: (Score:1)
I'm sure Pudge will whine about this ...
He rarely ventures into the 'hood. The cops would find him shivering on the street corner, all naked an' stuff. He can't handle anyplace where he's not in control.