More reaction to Condoleeza Rice daring to be gracious to a gay man's relatives over at the Freep joint. You're gonna love this one:
This is an issue that is going to affect the very foundation of our society. Soon "gay" marriage will become a reality putting the final nail in the coffin of the american family (if everything is marriage then nothing is marriage); thousands of young people are going to die of AIDS because they believe they have no choice but to be "gay"; it is not trivial.
Yes, someone actually wrote that. And meant it. Bloody hilarious.
- Log in to post comments
Is 'freep' a generally accepted abbreviation in the blogosphere for Free Republic? If so, can we start some kind of campaign to return it to its rightful owner, the Detroit Free Press? I'd hate to see its good name besmirched by the idiots at Free Republic.
I bet that people who believe stuff like that are complete closet cases, who spend every waking hour resisting the temptation of sodomy.
It's less funny when you realize that while this comment looks like a failure of rational thought to you or I, what we see here is actually a success story-- representing success for the relatively large and well-funded cottage industry based entirely around inducing people to think strange things like this...
I've only been married for 31 years and I have 2 children.
Some people even think I'm a Christian.
Still I can't quite work out what would change about my marriage if homosexuals married.
Can someone please explain the mechanism? I would greatly appreciate it if the explanation did not involve screaming.
Be wary of trawling through the mire that is Free Republic. Reading outbursts of right-wing lunacy can be strangely addictive. Sort of like watching a car wreck in progress, you know you shouldn't be looking, but it's almost impossible to turn away.
Jim it is simple, if I marry my boyfriend you will get the urge to turn gay and get a divorce and marry a man. You see when two gay men get married the "gay" gets amplified ten fold and straight men will not be able to resist
You know what: I think it's sweet Condi called them his "wonderful family" and his "mother-in-law", and that Laura is all smiling and everything... but the two of them are prime enablers of a party and an adminstration that would like to see that "wonderful family" totally illegal.
You see when two gay men get married the "gay" gets amplified ten fold and straight men will not be able to resist
You are so right. After attending a gay marriage (unrecognized by the state) I started to listen to Abba and even started to see the attraction to show toons. But it was when I went to a club and discovered that I was moving to the beat, believe me I can't dance to save my life, that I realized that I had gotten a huge, monster dose of "the gay." It took almost six weeks of continuous orgies, man free orgies - for me to sleep right, comfortable and secure in my heterosexuality. I may have to reconsider my feelings on gay marriage - if i got it that bad from a non-state sanctioned marriage - what would it be like if the state approved? Madness, the world would come to an end.
Coin is exactly right here, and the conservative programming is really deep and powerful. "Destroy Traditional Marriage" "Cut and Run" "Tax and Spend" "Support the Troops" These repetivite messages program brains. The liberal message is a bug on a windshield by comparison. That's why I'm confident the republicans are going to keep both houses this November.
Dum da dum da dum Yyyyyy Emmmm Ceee uh huh what? OMIGOD IT'S BEGUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111
Can someone please explain the mechanism? I would greatly appreciate it if the explanation did not involve screaming.
It's not so much that you will become gay, but rather because your marriage will have instantly lost all meaning, your kids are now from broken homes. They will quickly resort to drugs and gang violence as a result. If things get really bad, your kids will go gay. Next thing you know it, people might hold our President respondible for his horrendous decisions, and then that would be the end of freedom as we know it.
I don't see why that's so hard to understand. :)
It's all about the kids. Really. How can you be against he kids?
-Rob
What I want to know is when can we cut to the chase?
I've got my eye on this cute little beagle down the street.
It's all about the kids. Really. How can you be against he kids?
Because it takes a child to raze a village.
Yes, it's pretty common. A pity, too, since the Detroit Free Press would undoubtedly prefer not to be confused with the nut bags at Free Republic. The right-wing "freepers" use it as a verb, too, as when someone issues a call to fellow freepers to "freep" some on-line poll. Sometimes they also "freep" a political rally if they can get enough people together to protest an appearance by a liberal politician. (To a freeper, that's almost everyone who's not a fellow Kool-Aid drinker.) Fortunately, their freeping activities are limited by their comparative cowardice, since they prefer to travel in hyena packs and run away when their numbers are small (as they usually are).
thousands of young people are going to die of AIDS because they believe they have no choice but to be "gay"
So wait, I still have a choice??! I could have been having sex with women all this time? Son of a bitch!!
Is 'freep' a generally accepted abbreviation in the blogosphere for Free Republic?
Not in my experience. "Freeper" is. Problem is that "freep" forms the primary part of the domain name of the Detroit Free Press newspaper.
I used to post there (in defense of equal rights for gay people). At one point, someone admitted to me that he and most of the other people would never say the things that that they post in public or to anyone's face, but they are hiding behind the relative anonymity of the Internet to vent. In other words, most of the people who post there are chicken manure. This was confirmed when he himself claimed to live in San Francisco and complained that he had been discriminated against in employment by gay hiring managers because he was straight. When I asked him why he didn't take his complaint up with the state's equal employment authorities, he said that he didn't want to bother. The people there are not only chicken manure, they are also lazy.
If homosexuals are allowed to marry, then marriage is now any relationship at all. The word has no fixed meaning any more. Not only are you married to your wife, but you're now "married" to your kids, your parents, your siblings, your pets -- and your next door neighbor. Co-worker? Married. Regular customer? Married. Like to watch the Daily Show? You and Jon Stewart are now "married," if that's what the two of you decide to call it. And your poor wife can do nothing, since polygamy is okay.
Surely you can understand the legal chaos that will ensue. As the commentator points out, it is not trivial. No wonder it is hard to keep from screaming.
Sastra said -
Not only are you married to your wife, but you're now "married" to your kids, your parents, your siblings, your pets -- and your next door neighbor. Co-worker? Married. Regular customer? Married. Like to watch the Daily Show? You and Jon Stewart are now "married," if that's what the two of you decide to call it. And your poor wife can do nothing, since polygamy is okay.
That is the singularly most ridiculous statement I have read all week. And I've been reading Fundies say the darndest things.
DuWayne:
Thank you. That is indeed a compliment, as I have tried reading from "Fundies say the darndest things" and part of my brain melted. Perhaps that helped.
Uh, Sastra...
I don't think DuWayne knew you were being sarcastic.
Sastra -
Sorry, after reading FSTDT, I have found it hard to distinguish sarcasm from reality at times. I find that having a drink or a toke before reading such commentaries helps in preventing the brain melt - or at least brain melt resulting from the reading. . .
I'm pretty sure that what's going on here is simple greed; there's a certain dreary mentality that treats everything good in life as a zero-sum commodity. To someone like that, the value of anything (even marriage) depends on other people not being able to have it. They think their marriages are "special" because not everyone can get married. Such people are also under the delusion that everything good they have is the result of their own hard work, and therefore they get furious whenever someone else has a good thing "given" to them.
I've actually heard homophobes arguing that they worked for their marriage licenses, though when I've asked them to explain exactly how, they always switch personas from individualist to collectivist and argue that the work consists of heterosexuals as a group raising the next generation (suspiciously similar to the way racists argue that the "white race" invented the telephone or the like; they seem to believe that they get to share the credit when someone who merely looks slightly like them accomplishes anything). If I point out that procreation isn't a legal requirement for marriage, they always change the subject (they also almost always seem to think that biological fatherhood is some sort of great accomplishment deserving of reverence, even greater than actually raising one's children. Uh, folks, purely biological fatherhood is all play and no work, something that any messed-up 13-year-old can "achieve").
There may also be a "gay cooties" perception at work, the idea that whatever a gay man does, a straight man has to do the opposite or he's gay by association (think "wearing Speedos"). It's a pretty adolescent attitude and most people grow out of it by the time they turn 25, but it may linger in some. However, I still think the big factor is people taking inordinate pride in the circumstances of their births, the attitude that leads someone who was born on third base to think he hit a triple.