Homophobia: Fun Fact

[JakeStarkey]

The goofs just cannot leave the perversion and images of such alone.

 

[daveman]

Jake wouldn't recognize syntax and diction if they crawled up his ass and died next to the remains of his gerbil.

And you may consider that particular mental image to be my Christmas present to the world.

Could I have a gift receipt? I'd like to return it.

No exchanges, no refunds. But I can make you a good deal on a referral to a therapist to try to wipe the image from your mind.

Prolly be cheaper to get blasted on Bailey's & coffee -- and much more fun.

 

[JakeStarkey]

As the two clowns mumble and stumble and bumble grammatically along.

They have made my evening!

Could I have a gift receipt? I'd like to return it.

No exchanges, no refunds. But I can make you a good deal on a referral to a therapist to try to wipe the image from your mind.

Prolly be cheaper to get blasted on Bailey's & coffee -- and much more fun.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Could I have a gift receipt? I'd like to return it.

No exchanges, no refunds. But I can make you a good deal on a referral to a therapist to try to wipe the image from your mind.

Prolly be cheaper to get blasted on Bailey's & coffee -- and much more fun.

Good point. And now you have an excuse.

Merry Christmas, and you're welcome.

 

[daveman]

As the two clowns mumble and stumble and bumble grammatically along.

Sentence fragment.

 

[daveman]

No exchanges, no refunds. But I can make you a good deal on a referral to a therapist to try to wipe the image from your mind.

Prolly be cheaper to get blasted on Bailey's & coffee -- and much more fun.

Good point. And now you have an excuse.

Merry Christmas, and you're welcome.

Merry Christmas!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And they absolutely HATE it when you tell them their most effective weapon (since they don't have facts and logic) is utterly ineffective.

ALL of their weapons are ineffective on me, because all of their weapons are dependent on emotional "thinking", which I refuse to engage in, and dependent moreover on giving a damn what leftists think of you. I consider it a badge of honor to have them hate me. The worst insult I can think of is to have one of those evil, brainless fuckwits APPROVE of me.

Most extremists feed off their emotions.

I know that leftists lie, they're just a little more subtle at it than the extreme righties.

To illustrate, one of the things that drives me absolutely nuts about my fellow Republicans is their tendency to fall for fantasy-based chain letters. I receive tons of them.

The left and the right both create their "scare" emails using factual distortions and in some cases outright fabrications, but I see far more of them from the right. Anybody who takes 15 minutes to investigate the factual basis of them can debunk them easily enough, but that doesn't stop the people who create them.

Just go to snopes and enter the word "Obama" and you'll see pages and pages of items that were debunked from fantastic chain letters. I'm in no way a defender of Obama, but when I see the number of distorted truths and outright lies that have been circulated on this one man alone though these idiotic chain letters, my head spins. I can't even keep up. Every one of them feeds off of the emotions of who are basically good-hearted patriotic Americans, but who unfortunately fall for them more often than not. I'm sorry, but I don't care what side of the political fence one rests, I think you will agree that lying is not acceptable.

Why am I condemning this in the right and not the left, you may ask? Simple. I happen to believe in the intellectual value of Devil's Advocate. This was a practice developed by the Vatican to challenge the one's assertions, and by those that agreed with the assertion. The intent of this device was, and is, to strengthen the advocates of whatever the assertion is. While I am not a Christian, I definitely recognize the genius of this development.

I don't care to strengthen the left. I would much rather strengthen the right. You have challenged me before for being too "moderate." Well, I am more moderate than yourself, this is true. But one thing you can take to the bank is that my tendency to challenge my fellow Republicans is out of love, I can assure you, even if most of them hate my guts, or at least find me extremely annoying, or even "stupid" as some of them like to call me.

It's all good. I don't mind.

If you have any hope of accomplishing this you must first work to redefine ‘the right.’

The first step toward this goal is to return conservatism to its more pragmatic, facts-based roots, and away from blind partisanism and dogma, both from a fiscal and social standpoint.

As long as ‘the right’ continues to adhere to the nonsense espoused by the TPM and Christian fundamentalists, conservatism can never be strengthened.

 

[50_RiaL]

Chucky Hagel, possible Obama pick for sod is a big-time homophobe

 

[YoungRepublican]

same could be said for cannibalism...just sayin

Well thats not true at all. around 140 species have that trait actually.

 

[Cecilie1200]

same could be said for cannibalism...just sayin

Well thats not true at all. around 140 species have that trait actually.

Which one, homosexuality or cannibalism?

Not that it makes a damned bit of difference to normal human behavior, of course.

 

[YoungRepublican]

same could be said for cannibalism...just sayin

Well thats not true at all. around 140 species have that trait actually.

Which one, homosexuality or cannibalism?

Not that it makes a damned bit of difference to normal human behavior, of course.

Canabalism, but they are a little different. One is eating another human being and a heinous crime, the other is just two dudes that love each other keeping the population in check. these dudes dont get a free pass, If I have to be miserable they have the same right as me lol

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well thats not true at all. around 140 species have that trait actually.

Which one, homosexuality or cannibalism?

Not that it makes a damned bit of difference to normal human behavior, of course.

Canabalism, but they are a little different. One is eating another human being and a heinous crime, the other is just two dudes that love each other keeping the population in check. these dudes dont get a free pass, If I have to be miserable they have the same right as me lol

Um, no, dear. There are THOUSANDS of species in the animal kingdom which exhibit the behavior of cannibalism in one form or another.

You need a dictionary.

Cannibalism is defined as "the eating of the flesh of an animal by another animal of the same kind", and as I said, thousands of different animal species do this under various circumstances.

I'm not even vaguely interested in your personal maunderings on life, love, and homosexuality, so let's keep this factual and scientific as much as possible, okay?

 

[jtpr312]

I don't know of one species of animal that engages in oral or anal intercourse, so it sorta puts a lie to the sodomites crap about "animals engage in homosexual beahvior so it's only natural for us too".

 

[JakeStarkey]

So pathetic.

You may have noticed that newspaper and magazine journalists often use a dependent clause as a separate sentence when it follows clearly from the preceding main clause,. . . . This is a conventional journalistic practice, often used for emphasis.Purdue OWL: Sentence Fragments

As the two clowns mumble and stumble and bumble grammatically along.

Sentence fragment.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So pathetic.

You may have noticed that newspaper and magazine journalists often use a dependent clause as a separate sentence when it follows clearly from the preceding main clause,. . . . This is a conventional journalistic practice, often used for emphasis.Purdue OWL: Sentence Fragments

As the two clowns mumble and stumble and bumble grammatically along.

Sentence fragment.

When it is used for emphasis there have to be other sentences surrounding it to support the fragment. when it stands by itself it is simple an indication of idiocy.

Idiot.

 

[daveman]

So pathetic.

You may have noticed that newspaper and magazine journalists often use a dependent clause as a separate sentence when it follows clearly from the preceding main clause,. . . . This is a conventional journalistic practice, often used for emphasis.Purdue OWL: Sentence Fragments

As the two clowns mumble and stumble and bumble grammatically along.

Sentence fragment.

You're not a journalist, kid. You're a 20-year-old brat with a semester of Poli Sci 101 and a warped view of reality.

 

[JakeStarkey]

daveman is the 20 year old brat. I am a senior citizen just settled into retirement this last month.

And I just kicked daveman's ass on his sentence fragment post. Use Purdue's OWL system, daveman, to improve your writing. It needs some improvement.

 

[YoungRepublican]

Which one, homosexuality or cannibalism?

Not that it makes a damned bit of difference to normal human behavior, of course.

Canabalism, but they are a little different. One is eating another human being and a heinous crime, the other is just two dudes that love each other keeping the population in check. these dudes dont get a free pass, If I have to be miserable they have the same right as me lol

Um, no, dear. There are THOUSANDS of species in the animal kingdom which exhibit the behavior of cannibalism in one form or another.

You need a dictionary.

Cannibalism is defined as "the eating of the flesh of an animal by another animal of the same kind", and as I said, thousands of different animal species do this under various circumstances.

I'm not even vaguely interested in your personal maunderings on life, love, and homosexuality, so let's keep this factual and scientific as much as possible, okay?

Ladywildlife's Canniblaism in Animals Page
Do you want more research or should I just continue to throw out stupid numbers like you? If I could ask you to keep your opinions as scientific as possible. I also have no desire to listen to your various forms of hate speech.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Canabalism, but they are a little different. One is eating another human being and a heinous crime, the other is just two dudes that love each other keeping the population in check. these dudes dont get a free pass, If I have to be miserable they have the same right as me lol

Um, no, dear. There are THOUSANDS of species in the animal kingdom which exhibit the behavior of cannibalism in one form or another.

You need a dictionary.

Cannibalism is defined as "the eating of the flesh of an animal by another animal of the same kind", and as I said, thousands of different animal species do this under various circumstances.

I'm not even vaguely interested in your personal maunderings on life, love, and homosexuality, so let's keep this factual and scientific as much as possible, okay?

Ladywildlife's Canniblaism in Animals Page
Do you want more research or should I just continue to throw out stupid numbers like you? If I could ask you to keep your opinions as scientific as possible. I also have no desire to listen to your various forms of hate speech.

Please, keep throwing out numbers. There are at least 1500 different species that resort to cannibalism under different circumstances, not 140.

Cannibalism (zoology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Cecilie1200]

Canabalism, but they are a little different. One is eating another human being and a heinous crime, the other is just two dudes that love each other keeping the population in check. these dudes dont get a free pass, If I have to be miserable they have the same right as me lol

Um, no, dear. There are THOUSANDS of species in the animal kingdom which exhibit the behavior of cannibalism in one form or another.

You need a dictionary.

Cannibalism is defined as "the eating of the flesh of an animal by another animal of the same kind", and as I said, thousands of different animal species do this under various circumstances.

I'm not even vaguely interested in your personal maunderings on life, love, and homosexuality, so let's keep this factual and scientific as much as possible, okay?

Ladywildlife's Canniblaism in Animals Page
Do you want more research or should I just continue to throw out stupid numbers like you? If I could ask you to keep your opinions as scientific as possible. I also have no desire to listen to your various forms of hate speech.

Research?! What are you, twelve, that you think throwing up some anonymous broad's web page constitutes "research"?

Try THIS instead, Junior:

JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

(You'll have to actually go to the article and read it, because it doesn't allow for cut-and-paste.)

And that's an old article. The number is now accepted to be much higher.

This, of course, is the work on the subject most cited on academic websites, as well as many encyclopedic sites, so if you don't want to buy it, feel free to just look for the quotes all over the Internet.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Cannibalism-Ecology-Evolution-Among-Diverse/dp/B003WL3W7W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1356660268&sr=8-1&keywords=Cannibalism%3A+Ecology+and+Evolution+of+Cannibalism+among+Diverse+Taxa]Amazon.com: Cannibalism, Ecology and Evolution Among Diverse Taxa: Mark A., Crespi, Bernard J., Editors Elgar: Books[/ame]

Now run along, Junior. I hear your X-Box calling you.